header-logo header-logo

06 March 2015 / David di Mambro
Issue: 7643 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail

Part 36 remastered

nlj_7643_di-mambro

The revised Part 36: an offer they cannot defuse? By David di Mambro

CPR Part 36 has been substantially revised and replaced with effect from 6 April 2015 (Civil Procedure (Amendment No 8) Rules 2014 (SI 2014/3299)).

It has been necessary to re-number the revised Part 36. Consequently, when considering any case law, one must take care to identify whether the case is referring to a rule number in the old Part 36 or a rule number in the revised Part 36. All rule numbers in this article will refer to the revised rule unless otherwise stated.

A Destinations Table is set out at the end of this article.

Transitionals

The revised Part 36 will apply to offers made on or after 6 April 2015. As appears from the transitional provisions in the SI, some of the new rules in Part 36 will apply to the old Part 36 regime where the offer:

  • was made before 6 April 2015, but
  • a trial of any part of the claim or of any issue
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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll