header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Playing by the rules

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
03 May 2018 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7791 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
nlj_7791_regan

A Part 36 offer can bring a plethora of benefits, but there is no room for manoeuvre when it comes to compliance, says Dominic Regan

  • An offer is either compliant or not.There is no scope for circumventing the explicit requirements of the code.

‘Part 36 is highly prescriptive (so that even experienced lawyers may fail to make a compliant offer)’ said Burnton LJ in Webb v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWCA Civ 365, [2016] All ER (D) 103 (Apr) at para [1]. Disconcertingly, it now appears that this most significant of measures is not always being understood by the judiciary.

In Ali v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) at paras [42]–[43], the claimant contended a joint offer made under Part 36 was invalid. Arnold J decided that it was not open to the claimants to raise this objection. They had failed to take the point upon receipt of the offer.

A similar issue arose in Seeff

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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML
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
NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity
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
NLJ this week: A prince no more?
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
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
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'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
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
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll