A recent case underscores that best practice is to only make receiving party Pt 36 offers on discrete & significant issues, says Francis Kendall
- In White and another (executors of the estate of William White, deceased) v Wincott Galliford Ltd, the costs master concluded that it would be unjust to award the claimants a 10% uplift on the assessed costs.
In May, Deputy Master Friston delivered his judgment at the Senior Courts Costs Office in White and another (executors of the estate of William White, deceased) v Wincott Galliford Ltd [2019] EWHC B6 (Costs), [2019] Lexis Citation 51. The case concerned a Pt 36 offer made by the receiving party that went solely to the hourly rates. The hourly rates contained in the offer were allowed on assessment and the judgment concerned the impact of that result.
Formidable obstacles
It is perhaps easiest to focus on the uplift sought by the receiving party, who said they were entitled to an ‘additional amount’ pursuant to r 36.17(4)(d). They sought a 10% uplift and, as this related to the hourly rates, said it
