header-logo header-logo

19 October 2012 / Clive Thomas
Issue: 7534 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

The write path

Clive Thomas emphasises the importance of the careful drafting of Pt 36 offers

In the recent case of PHI Group Ltd v Robert West Consulting Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 588, [2012] All ER (D) 34 (Jun) the Court of Appeal provided guidance as to the requirements that a party must comply with to bring an offer letter within the ambit of Pt 36.

The appeal arose out of contribution proceedings between the appellant and respondent for their alleged negligence in the design and construction of a train servicing depot. At trial the judge apportioned responsibility as to 60% in respect of PHI and 40% in respect of RWC. There were a number of issues taken on appeal. This article will concentrate only upon whether an offer made by PHI was a Pt 36 offer.

The offer letter

The essential elements of PHI’s purported Pt 36 offer letter are set out below:

  1. Our client offers to split liability with your client on a 70:30
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

Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin

Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin

Boodle Hatfield welcomes new employment partner, Tom McLaughlin

Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov

Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov

National specialist pensions law firm strengthens team with three new appointments

Jurit—Christian Abletshauser

Jurit—Christian Abletshauser

Jurit appoints Christian Abletshauser to lead family law practice

NEWS
Burges Salmon appoints Benn Richards to strengthen Contentious Insolvency offering
Jonathan Fisher KC’s wide-ranging fraud report contains worthwhile proposals, but turning them into workable reform will require money, capacity and political will
A Court of Appeal ruling shows that a failed nuisance claim may still leave a neighbour liable in negligence where foreseeable harm could readily have been avoided
The government has stepped back from a proposed early-release exclusion limited to unlawful act manslaughter, opting instead to exclude all manslaughter sentences
A High Court decision has clarified that a home may be unfit for human habitation not only where conditions endanger health or safety, but also where they seriously undermine comfort and convenience
back-to-top-scroll