Part 36: Humble offerings

4 King’s Bench Walk (Chambers of Timothy Raggatt QC) | The Commercial Litigation Journal | May/June 2015 #61
David Sawtell analyses recent caselaw on Part 36 ‘There is a tension between the natural inclination to make a proportionate costs order where a party has lost on discrete issues and the prescriptive nature of Part 36.’Practitioners frequently debate tactics and strategy when negotiating the litigation and settlement of claims. One of the most important …

Continue reading "Part 36: Humble offerings"

This post is only available to members.

Costs: Sharing the blame

Clyde & Co LLP | The Commercial Litigation Journal | May/June 2015 #61
Andrew Kelmanson provides a timely reminder of the law behind co-defendant costs orders ‘Claimants involved in multi-party litigation may apply to the courts to make discretionary costs orders in circumstances where a claimant succeeds against one or more defendants, but does not succeed against others.’ Alongside determining the liability of the parties to proceedings, courts …

Continue reading "Costs: Sharing the blame"

This post is only available to members.

Part 36: An unsettling time?

Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP | The Commercial Litigation Journal | March/April 2015 #60
Alex Fox, Chris Hoyer Millar and Clare Arthurs discuss the evolution of offers to settle, Part 44 and changes to Part 36 ‘Coward clearly shows that the courts will approach the question of costs differently according to whether the parties have made a Calderbank offer or a Part 36 offer.’Litigation, we are told, should be …

Continue reading "Part 36: An unsettling time?"

This post is only available to members.