Costs lawyer Pre-Issue Part 36 Offers

The recent confusion caused by the decision in Udogaranya v Nwagw [2010]EWHC 90186 (Costs) regarding the costs consequences of accepting a pre-issue Part 36 Offers appears to have been resolved by the recent case of Thompson & Thompson v Bruce [2011]QBD (28.06.11). In this case Deputy High Court Judge John Leighton Williams QC found that ‘proceedings’ in CPR r.36.10 should be given a wider meaning to include that which took place prior to the commencement of proceedings. Costs lawyer Pre-Issue Part 36 Offers.

He said that the intention of CPR r.36 was to create a more practical approach to the settlement of claims with CPR r.36.3(2)(a) permitting Part 36 Offers to be made before proceedings were issued.  If there was no entitlement to costs pre-issue this would effectively frustrate the purpose of CPR r.36 and would encourage parties to issue proceedings just to protect their position on costs, thereby contradicting the overall intention of the rules which was to promote early pre-issue settlement.click here

It is hoped that this decision will deter Defendants from seeking to avoid their costs liabilities by relying on a technical and clearly flawed argument in relation to the interpretation of CPR r.36. Call to speak to a Costs lawyer. Costs lawyer Pre-Issue Part 36 Offers