header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The write path

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
19 October 2012 / Clive Thomas
Issue: 7534 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML
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
NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity
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
NLJ this week: A prince no more?
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
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
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'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
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
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll