header-logo header-logo

17 June 2011 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7470 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs , CPR
printer mail-detail

The second coming

Dominic Regan salutes the welcome return of Part 36

“This offer is open for 21 days,” was the seemingly innocuous phrase which nearly brought down Pt 36, caused many lawyers sleepless nights and necessitated hearings in the Chancery Division and the Court of Appeal. All is now resolved with the unanimous decision of the Court of Appeal in C v D [2011] EWCA Civ 646, [2011] All ER (D) 287 (May) a decision which is spot on.

C v D

The claimant in a substantial property dispute received an offer plastered with references to Pt 36. It should be appreciated at the outset that saying it is a Pt 36 offer does not necessarily mean that it is in law effective. For example, a valid offer must specify a relevant period of no less than 21 days’ duration. The significance of the relevant period is that if the offer is accepted within that time then costs will follow. It does not

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll