header-logo header-logo

20 November 2014 / Giles Hutt , Alex Sciannaca
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail

Time for a spring clean?

huttsciannaca

Part 36 is in need of revision to make it more transparent for parties & their lawyers say Alex Sciannaca & Giles Hutt

The general view is that Pt 36, governing formal offers to settle, is one of the more successful parts of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), but is in urgent need of a spring clean. Since it was last revised in April 2007, a number of specific problems have arisen that need to be dealt with sooner rather than later, and some of the key provisions of Pt 36 are anyway needlessly technical and should be made a lot simpler. Excessive technicality leads to mistakes being made, and so many supposed “Pt 36 offers” are in reality no such thing, and may have only a marginal influence on any costs order made by the court—the opposite of the offeror’s expectations. At the same time, lack of clarity as to how Pt 36 works makes it less effective than it should be as a system of sticks and carrots for herding parties towards settlement—a public policy imperative, given the

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