High Court: part 36 offer extinguished earlier common law offer – Litigation Futures

Posted November 22nd, 2016 in dispute resolution, news, part 36 offers, time limits by sally

‘A part 36 offer acts as a counter-offer that extinguishes an earlier offer based on common law principles, the High Court has ruled in a decision that one of the solicitors involved said “could influence settlement techniques and tactics in many commercial disputes in future”.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 22nd November 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on High Court: part 36 offer extinguished earlier common law offer – Litigation Futures

Costs relevant to part 36 consequences – but not to whether offer has been beaten, says High Court – Litigation Futures

Posted November 3rd, 2016 in costs, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘Costs should not be taken into account when deciding whether a part 36 offer has been beaten, the High Court has ruled, but they are relevant when deciding whether to apply the consequences of beating an offer.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 1st November 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Costs relevant to part 36 consequences – but not to whether offer has been beaten, says High Court – Litigation Futures

One direction – New Law Journal

Posted October 31st, 2016 in costs, damages, news, part 36 offers, personal injuries by sally

‘Kerry Underwood examines qualified one-way costs shifting.’

Full story

New Law Journal, 18th October 2016

Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk

Comments Off on One direction – New Law Journal

Costs judge gives another CFA assignment the thumbs-up – Litigation Futures

Posted August 24th, 2016 in assignment, contracts, costs, fees, news, part 36 offers, solicitors by sally

‘The assignment of conditional fee agreements (CFAs) is under the spotlight yet again after a costs judge ruled that one had been validly made.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 23rd August 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Costs judge gives another CFA assignment the thumbs-up – Litigation Futures

Landlords behaving badly – Nearly Legal

‘While the Magistrates Courts continue to hand out paltry fines to landlords on conviction for illegal eviction, despite the removal of the upper £5000 limit, it is good to see that the civil courts are capable of taking a more reasonable approach to quantum.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 13th August 2016

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Comments Off on Landlords behaving badly – Nearly Legal

Claimant who only beat part 36 offer because of post-Brexit fall in sterling denied usual rewards – Litigation Futures

Posted August 1st, 2016 in costs, EC law, indemnities, insurance, news, part 36 offers, referendums by Mark L

‘A claimant who only beat his part 36 offer because of the fall in the value of sterling since the Brexit vote has been denied the usual benefits of enhanced interest, indemnity costs and an additional payment that would have been the maximum £75,000 given the sums at stake.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 29th July 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Claimant who only beat part 36 offer because of post-Brexit fall in sterling denied usual rewards – Litigation Futures

High Court: part 36 offer meant party could not accept earlier ‘without prejudice’ offer – Litigation Futures

‘The High Court has ruled that a claimant’s part 36 offer was a counter-offer, meaning that an earlier common law offer by the defendants no longer remained open for acceptance.’

Full story

Litigation futures, 15th July 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on High Court: part 36 offer meant party could not accept earlier ‘without prejudice’ offer – Litigation Futures

Changing the effect – Counsel

Posted July 13th, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, debts, dilapidations, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘Litigators beware – open conduct in litigation could change the effect of a Part 36 offer, warns Alan Tunkel.’

Full story

Counsel, July 2016

Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk

Comments Off on Changing the effect – Counsel

DB UK Bank Ltd (trading as DB Mortgages) v Jacobs Solicitors – WLR Daily

DB UK Bank Ltd (trading as DB Mortgages) v Jacobs Solicitors [2016 [EWHC] 1614 (Ch)

‘The claimant bank brought a claim for professional negligence against the defendant firm of solicitors. The claimant’s solicitors sent a letter to the defendant’s solicitors stating that they were accepting the defendant’s offer to settle contained in a “ without prejudice save as to costs” letter (“WPSAC letter”) and enclosing a draft Tomlin order. A series of without prejudice letters and conversations followed. The defendant’s solicitors wrote reiterating the terms of their offer of settlement. Subsequently, the claimant’s solicitors sent a without prejudice letter containing a CPR Pt 36 offer. The parties differed as to the effect of the claimant’s Part 36 offer on the defendant’s WPSAC letter. The defendant contended that the claimant’s Part 36 offer was a counteroffer and, in law, had the effect of rejecting its WPSAC letter so that thereafter, it was not open for acceptance.’

WLR Daily, 4th July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on DB UK Bank Ltd (trading as DB Mortgages) v Jacobs Solicitors – WLR Daily

Has the Claimant Beaten its Part 36 Offer? Perhaps not as Simple as it Looks – Zenith PI Blog

‘HHJ Pelling QC considered whether, when considering if a claimant had beaten its Part 36 offer, the court should simply compare the amount of the judgment with the offer the claimant had made or if account should be taken of the interest that had accrued in the period leading up to the trial.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 13th July 2016

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Has the Claimant Beaten its Part 36 Offer? Perhaps not as Simple as it Looks – Zenith PI Blog

Claimant who only beat part 36 offer because of interest “not entitled to enhanced costs” – Litigation Futures

Posted July 5th, 2016 in civil procedure rules, costs, damages, interest, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘A claimant who only beat his part 36 offer at trial because of the interest on the damages awarded through to judgment is not entitled to enhanced costs, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 4th July 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Claimant who only beat part 36 offer because of interest “not entitled to enhanced costs” – Litigation Futures

Part 36 uplift for beating offer includes contractual interest, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Posted June 30th, 2016 in civil procedure rules, interest, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘The 10% uplift claimants receive for beating their part 36 offer includes contractual interest on the sum won at trial, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 27th June 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Part 36 uplift for beating offer includes contractual interest, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Part 36 uplift for beating offer includes contractual interest, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

‘The 10% uplift claimants receive for beating their part 36 offer includes contractual interest on the sum won at trial, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 27th June 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Part 36 uplift for beating offer includes contractual interest, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Successful part 36 offer removes cap on provisional assessment costs, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Posted June 23rd, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘A successful part 36 offer in a provisional assessment removes the £1,500 costs cap, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 23rd June 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.co.uk

Comments Off on Successful part 36 offer removes cap on provisional assessment costs, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Crazy little thing called proportionality causes hammer to fall on Queen guitarist’s costs – Litigation Futures

‘Lawyers should tell clients in cases where costs significantly exceed damages that the new test of proportionality means they will receive “no more than a contribution” to those costs if they are successful, a costs judge has said.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 17th June 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Crazy little thing called proportionality causes hammer to fall on Queen guitarist’s costs – Litigation Futures

PI victim gets 100% costs – despite failing with one allegation – Law Society’s Gazette

‘The Court of Appeal has ruled that a claimant should be awarded full costs of bringing her case despite losing on one of the issues.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 15th April 2015

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off on PI victim gets 100% costs – despite failing with one allegation – Law Society’s Gazette

Court of Appeal overturns issues-based part 36 offer – Litigation Futures

‘Judges can make issues-based costs orders under part 36 but only if it is unjust to deprive a successful claimant of all or part of their costs, the Court of Appeal has ruled in overturning such an order.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 15th April 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Court of Appeal overturns issues-based part 36 offer – Litigation Futures

High Court rejects Clifford’s attempt to slash costs through “inadequate” Calderbank offer – Litigation Futures

Posted March 21st, 2016 in costs, damages, news, part 36 offers, privacy, proportionality, striking out by tracey

‘The High Court has rejected jailed publicist Max Clifford’s attempt to limit his costs to only £5,000 in a privacy claim by making an “inadequate” Calderbank offer.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 21st March 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on High Court rejects Clifford’s attempt to slash costs through “inadequate” Calderbank offer – Litigation Futures

Defendants lose out as judges insist on strict interpretation of part 36 – Litigation Futures

Posted March 17th, 2016 in civil procedure rules, costs, interpretation, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘Defendants have failed in two separate recent attempts to persuade courts to interpret the part 36 costs rules in a way that suited them.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 16th March 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Defendants lose out as judges insist on strict interpretation of part 36 – Litigation Futures

Littlestone and others v Macleish – WLR Daily

Posted March 15th, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, law reports, part 36 offers by sally

Littlestone and others v Macleish [2016] EWCA Civ 127

‘An admitted payment on account of a claim following a Part 36 offer to settle a claim of a higher amount was, in the absence of contrary agreement, made as much on account of the Part 36 offer as on account of the full sum claimed. It would be an absurdity for a defendant to be bound to pay an aggregated total of a Part 36 offer and an admissions payment that was larger than the total sum claimed (paras 23–24).’

WLR Daily, 10th March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Littlestone and others v Macleish – WLR Daily