header-logo header-logo

Part 36: a welcome return to simplicity?

15 August 2019 / Joel Douglas
Issue: 7853 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Post-JLE, parties wishing to escape Part 36 consequences should once again find this an exceptionally daunting task, says Joel Douglas

  • While no rule should be without exceptions, the ‘formidable obstacle’ of the injustice test has been re-affirmed.

The Provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules are rarely straight forward and without controversy. Many provisions of the CPR require complex Practice Directions, numerous judicial decisions and various amendments through the years in order that practitioners can be relatively confident that they are applying the provisions correctly. However, the provisions of Part 36, as far as Civil Procedure Rules go, appear relatively straightforward.

For claimants, providing the formalities of CPR 36.5 are met the consequences are clear.

Equal or better your offer at assessment pursuant to CPR 36.17 (1)(b) and, unless the court considers it unjust to make such an award, become entitled to:

  • interest on the whole or part of any sum of money at a rate not exceeding 10% above base rate (36.17 (4)(a));
  • costs on the indemnity
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

Manchester’s online LLM has accelerated career progression for its graduates

mfg Solicitors—Philip Chapman

mfg Solicitors—Philip Chapman

Regional firm strengthens corporate team with partner hire

Switalskis—Sally Christey, Mathew Abiagom & Cyman Kaur

Switalskis—Sally Christey, Mathew Abiagom & Cyman Kaur

Commercial property team expands with trio of appointments

NEWS
Judging is ‘more intellectually demanding than any other role in public life’—and far messier than outsiders imagine. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC reflects on decades spent wrestling with unclear legislation, fragile precedent and human fallibility
The long-predicted death of the billable hour may finally be here—and this time, it’s armed with a scythe. In a sweeping critique of time-based billing, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, argues in this week's NLJ that artificial intelligence has made hourly charging ‘intellectually, commercially and ethically indefensible’
From fake authorities to rent reform, the civil courts have had a busy start to 2026. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold surveys a procedural landscape where guidance, discretion and discipline are all under strain
Fact-finding hearings remain a fault line in private family law. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors analyse recent appeals exposing the dangers of rushed or fragmented findings
As the Winter Olympics open in Milan and Cortina, legal disputes are once again being resolved almost as fast as the athletes compete. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys examines the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (CAS's) ad hoc divisions, which can decide cases within 24 hours
back-to-top-scroll