header-logo header-logo

Change management

14 January 2016 / Emily Hillson
Issue: 7682 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , CPR , Jackson , Part 36
printer mail-detail
nlj_7682_hilson

Need to change your Pt 36 offer? Emily Hillson provides guidance

Before even thinking of changing a Pt 36 offer I suggest you wrap a cold towel around your head. I hope that the cold towel and this article will help you understand the effects of changing a Pt 36 after the relevant period, the factors that should be taken into account when deciding whether to change an offer, and how to respond to an offer that has been changed.

Changing a Pt 36 offer after the relevant period

The effects of changing a Pt 36 offer differ depending on whether the offer is changed to make the terms more or less advantageous to the offeree. The differences can be illustrated by the following two scenarios. The backdrop to each is that a litigant has previously made a Pt 36 offer which relates to the whole of the claim, but developments in the case mean that the offer is now

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

Muckle LLP—Phoebe Gogarty

Muckle LLP—Phoebe Gogarty

North East firm welcomes employment specialist

Browne Jacobson—Colette Withey

Browne Jacobson—Colette Withey

Partner joins commercial and technology practice

Ellisons—Lizzy Firmin

Ellisons—Lizzy Firmin

Chief operating officer joins equity partnership

NEWS
In this week's NLJ, Sophie Houghton of LexisPSL distils the key lesson from recent costs cases: if you want to exceed guideline hourly rates (GHR), you must prove why
With chronic underfunding and rising demand leaving thousands without legal help, technology could transform access to justice—if handled wisely, writes Professor Sue Prince of the University of Exeter in this week's NLJ
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
back-to-top-scroll