header-logo header-logo

20 November 2014 / Giles Hutt , Alex Sciannaca
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail

Time for a spring clean?

huttsciannaca

Part 36 is in need of revision to make it more transparent for parties & their lawyers say Alex Sciannaca & Giles Hutt

The general view is that Pt 36, governing formal offers to settle, is one of the more successful parts of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), but is in urgent need of a spring clean. Since it was last revised in April 2007, a number of specific problems have arisen that need to be dealt with sooner rather than later, and some of the key provisions of Pt 36 are anyway needlessly technical and should be made a lot simpler. Excessive technicality leads to mistakes being made, and so many supposed “Pt 36 offers” are in reality no such thing, and may have only a marginal influence on any costs order made by the court—the opposite of the offeror’s expectations. At the same time, lack of clarity as to how Pt 36 works makes it less effective than it should be as a system of sticks and carrots

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

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