header-logo header-logo

02 June 2011
Issue: 7468 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Practice—Offer to settle—CPR Pt 36 offer

C v D [2011] EWCA Civ 646

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Rix, Rimer and Stanley Burnton LJJ, 27 May 2011

CPR Pt 36 does not accommodate a time-limited offer. The essence of a Pt 36 offer is that it lies on the table until formally withdrawn. Only an offer which has not been withdrawn down to the commencement of trial is capable of having the scheme’s costs consequences set out in Pt 36.14.

Michael Barnes QC (instructed by SJ Berwin LLP) for the claimant. Sue Carr QC and Jonathan Hough (instructed by Rawlinson Butler LLP) for the defendants.

The claimant and defendant were involved in a contractual dispute concerning the sale of development land. During the course of the dispute, the claimant sent a letter headed “Offer to Settle under CPR Part 36”. The offer purported to be “open for 21 days”. E-mail correspondence followed between the parties and in the event the defendant purported to accept the offer outside the 21 days.

The claimant applied under CPR 3(1)(m), seeking a declaration

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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll