header-logo header-logo

14 July 2011 / Darren Sylvester
Issue: 7474 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Part & parcel

Darren Sylvester toys with the Part 36 conundrum

Recent court decisions have confirmed that Pt 36 of the CPR is a self-contained code governed by its own provisions. General common law principles relating to offer and acceptance do not apply (see Gibbon v Manchester City Council and LG Blower Specialist Bricklayer Ltd v Reeves [2010] EWCA Civ 726, [2011] 2 All ER 258).

Even more recently was the decision of C v D and another [2010] EWHC 2940 (Ch), [2011] 2 All ER 404. In this case, the question arose whether the claimant’s offer to settle—which was expressed to be open for acceptance for a specified period of time—was a Pt 36 offer.

In C v D and another the claimant brought proceedings against the defendants for damages for the defendants’ alleged breach of contract in relation to a sale of land. The claimant made an offer by letter headed “Offer to settle under CPR Pt 36”, which included reference to the offer being open for 21 days from the date of the letter

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll