header-logo header-logo

Seeking settlement

15 January 2009 / Deborah Edwards
Issue: 7352 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Deborah Edwards on how to avoid the pitfalls of Part 36 offers

In April 2009 the “new” rules governing Part 36 offers will have been in practice for two years. The most significant change has been the abolition of the need for parties to physically pay a sum of money into court to show that they were “good for the money”. The new rules allow any party to make a written off er to settle which can be in respect of any issue.

In the overwhelming majority of cases one and sometimes both parties will seek to conclude an action without it proceeding to a full hearing by making a Part 36 offer to settle. Under Part 36, the person who receives a Part 36 offer can accept “at any time” without the permission of the court, not just within a 21-day period but at any time after that and prior to commencement of trial, provided the party accepting the offer pays the other parties costs.

The implications

A claimant can no longer treat

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