header-logo header-logo

25 January 2013 / David di Mambro
Issue: 7545 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

Room for improvement

istock_000011386657small_2

David di Mambro provides a masterclass in Part 36

When the CPR came into being many regarded the creation of a claimant’s Part 36 offer as being one of the CPR’s greatest achievements. The Part was subject to wholesale amendment in April 2007 when the primary driving force was the dispensation with payments into court where:

  • vast sums of money were being paid into court by, in effect, the government in relation to clinical negligence cases where the defendant’s ability to pay was not in doubt;
  • the administration of the account holding the funds and the interest thereon were very expensive.

There was a view that one could not relax the rule in relation to “payment in” simply for the government or some institution ultimately backed by the government and not do so for every defendant. The opportunity was taken to “improve” the rule. This was ultimately done in comparative haste. Recent case law has produced some unexpected results which suggest that

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

Fieldfisher—Will Sharp

Fieldfisher—Will Sharp

Fieldfisher boosts structured finance practice with appointment of Will Sharp

gunnercooke—Thomas Bjorn & Peter Rudd-Clarke

gunnercooke—Thomas Bjorn & Peter Rudd-Clarke

gunnercooke grows its life sciences team with new partner hires

Leonard Curtis Legal—Mark Maguire & Kane Jones

Leonard Curtis Legal—Mark Maguire & Kane Jones

Leonard Curtis Legal expands corporate team with twonew appointments

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll