header-logo header-logo

15 January 2009 / Deborah Edwards
Issue: 7352 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Seeking settlement

Deborah Edwards on how to avoid the pitfalls of Part 36 offers

In April 2009 the “new” rules governing Part 36 offers will have been in practice for two years. The most significant change has been the abolition of the need for parties to physically pay a sum of money into court to show that they were “good for the money”. The new rules allow any party to make a written off er to settle which can be in respect of any issue.

In the overwhelming majority of cases one and sometimes both parties will seek to conclude an action without it proceeding to a full hearing by making a Part 36 offer to settle. Under Part 36, the person who receives a Part 36 offer can accept “at any time” without the permission of the court, not just within a 21-day period but at any time after that and prior to commencement of trial, provided the party accepting the offer pays the other parties costs.

The implications

A claimant can no longer treat a Part 36 offer as the bottom line safety net.

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll