header-logo header-logo

Part 36 remastered

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll