header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 October 2012 / Clive Thomas
Issue: 7534 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

The write path

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll