header-logo header-logo

Practice—Offer to settle—CPR Pt 36 offer

02 June 2011
Issue: 7468 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

C v D [2011] EWCA Civ 646

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Rix, Rimer and Stanley Burnton LJJ, 27 May 2011

CPR Pt 36 does not accommodate a time-limited offer. The essence of a Pt 36 offer is that it lies on the table until formally withdrawn. Only an offer which has not been withdrawn down to the commencement of trial is capable of having the scheme’s costs consequences set out in Pt 36.14.

Michael Barnes QC (instructed by SJ Berwin LLP) for the claimant. Sue Carr QC and Jonathan Hough (instructed by Rawlinson Butler LLP) for the defendants.

The claimant and defendant were involved in a contractual dispute concerning the sale of development land. During the course of the dispute, the claimant sent a letter headed “Offer to Settle under CPR Part 36”. The offer purported to be “open for 21 days”. E-mail correspondence followed between the parties and in the event the defendant purported to accept the offer outside the 21 days.

The claimant applied under CPR 3(1)(m), seeking a declaration

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll