A Part 36 offer UK 2026 is the settlement tool with real teeth in English civil litigation: a formal offer made under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules that puts the other side’s costs position at risk if they refuse it and fail to do better at trial. Accept within the 21-day relevant period and the case ends on known terms. Refuse, and the refusing party gambles on beating the offer, with indemnity costs, enhanced interest and a capped damages uplift waiting on the wrong side of that bet. This guide explains how the mechanism works, what each outcome costs, and how offers are timed and pitched in practice.
Most civil claims settle, and Part 36 exists to make settlement rational rather than reluctant. It converts an offer to compromise into a formal instrument with automatic, rule-based consequences, so refusing a sensible offer stops being cost-free. Either side can deploy it: claimants to pressure defendants into paying properly, defendants to cap their exposure and transfer risk.
The regime sits in CPR Part 36 and is deliberately self-contained: an offer either complies with its formalities and earns the automatic consequences, or it does not and falls back to being an ordinary offer the court may merely take into account. That difference decides real money, which is why the formalities matter.
What a Part 36 Offer Is and How to Make One
Practitioners usually make offers on the prescribed court form, which walks through every required element, though a compliant letter works equally well. What matters is completeness: each formal requirement present, the scope of the offer unambiguous, and the document dated and served so the relevant period can be counted with certainty.
A valid offer must be in writing, make clear it is made pursuant to Part 36, specify a relevant period of at least 21 days within which the defendant will be liable for the claimant’s costs if accepted, and state whether it relates to the whole claim, part of it, or an issue. Miss one of these and the teeth fall out.
The mechanism is available in almost any civil claim: debt and damages actions, professional negligence, personal injury, contract and property disputes, counterclaims, and even appeals, where fresh offers can be made on appeal-specific terms. Money and non-money claims alike qualify, provided the offer’s terms are capable of acceptance. Straightforward money disputes can begin through the online money claim service, but the offer rules are identical whatever the route in.
Offers are made without prejudice save as to costs: the trial judge does not see them until liability and quantum are decided, at which point they transform the costs argument. Offers can be made before proceedings start, and in money claims an accepted offer must generally be paid within 14 days.
Acceptance is mechanically simple: serve written notice of acceptance while the offer remains open, and before trial no court permission is usually needed. Acceptance stays the proceedings immediately on the offer’s agreed terms, converting a live dispute into an enforceable settlement, which is why authority to accept should be arranged well before the deadline rather than negotiated against it.
Two pieces of small print carry weight. The relevant period is counted from service of the offer, so serving late on a Friday effectively gifts the other side extra thinking time. And costs on acceptance means costs assessed on the standard basis up to the date of acceptance, so an early acceptance keeps that bill short, while a late one grows it daily.
Both sides use the same instrument differently. A claimant’s offer says: pay slightly less than my best case and end this. A defendant’s offer says: take this now, because if the judgment comes in lower, you fund the litigation from the day the offer lapsed. Well-run cases often see competing Part 36 offers refining each other as evidence emerges.
The Cost Consequences, Outcome by Outcome
Acceptance within the relevant period is the clean outcome: the claim ends and the defendant pays the claimant’s reasonable costs up to acceptance. Late acceptance normally adds liability for the other side’s costs from expiry of the relevant period to acceptance, a quietly expensive delay.
Where a claimant beats their own offer at trial, judgment at least as advantageous as the offer, the rewards stack: indemnity-basis costs from expiry, enhanced interest on both damages and costs at up to 10% above base rate, and an additional amount on top of damages of 10% of the first £500,000 and 5% of the next £500,000, capped at £75,000.
Where a claimant fails to beat a defendant’s offer, the claimant, despite winning the case, pays the defendant’s costs from expiry of the relevant period plus interest on those costs, and loses recovery of their own costs for that period. On long trials, that split routinely swallows most of the damages.
Keep the offer clean of costs terms: a compliant Part 36 offer deals with the claim and lets the rules allocate costs, and offers expressed as inclusive of costs generally fall outside the regime altogether. Equally, at least as advantageous means exactly that in money claims: matching the offer to the pound is enough for a claimant to earn the enhanced package.
Worked through, the arithmetic persuades. A claimant offers to accept £80,000; the defendant refuses; judgment lands at £85,000 a year later. The claimant now recovers indemnity costs for that year, interest on damages and costs at up to 10% above base, and an £8,500 additional amount, easily £40,000 to £60,000 of swing on a middling case, all self-inflicted by the refusal.
Reverse it: the defendant offers £50,000, the claimant presses on and wins £40,000. The claimant takes their £40,000 but pays the defendant’s post-expiry costs and forfeits their own for the same period. On a case that ran to trial, the damages cheque frequently changes hands twice, ending mostly with the lawyers on the wrong side of the offer.
The uplift is capped, the risk is not.A claimant’s maximum additional amount is £75,000, but a refusing party’s exposure to indemnity costs and enhanced interest has no such ceiling: it grows with every week of litigation after the offer expires.
Where both sides have live offers, the judgment is measured against each independently: it is entirely possible to beat one and fall short of the other, and the consequences net off accordingly. That is deliberate, and it is why serious litigation is often conducted between two standing offers being nudged as the evidence firms up.
The court retains an escape valve, disapplying consequences where they would be unjust, but the bar is high and honest miscalculation does not clear it. Genuine offers, not tactical shams pitched at 99% of the claim, earn the protection.
Part 36 in the Headlines: Hugh Grant and Prince Harry
Two recent cases put the mechanism on front pages. Hugh Grant settled his privacy claim against News Group Newspapers in 2024 after receiving what he described as an enormous sum, explaining publicly that refusing risked paying both sides’ costs even if he won but recovered less than the offer. The rule, not the merits, drove the endgame.
The Duke of Sussex settled with News Group in January 2025 on similar dynamics, with the offer structure making trial an irrational financial choice however strongly each side believed its case. The lesson for ordinary litigation is identical: a well-pitched Part 36 offer can end even the most entrenched dispute, because it reprices refusal.
Scale down to an ordinary dispute and the same forces apply with sharper teeth, because costs loom larger relative to the sums claimed. In a £60,000 contract claim, six months of post-offer litigation can generate costs exposure rivalling the claim itself, which is why the arrival of a credible, properly served offer so often marks the beginning of the end of the dispute.
Media litigation also shows the deterrent working at scale: with trial costs for each side running into millions, a substantial offer converts every additional week of principle into quantifiable financial exposure, which is precisely what the rule was designed to do.
Neither case is unusual in anything but scale. The same arithmetic ends commercial disputes, professional negligence claims and personal injury cases every week; our civil litigation timeline traces how costs-shifting became the engine of English settlement practice.
Recent Case Law and Common Traps
The recurring disputes are about validity and withdrawal. Offers that muddle the relevant period, purport to exclude interest, or bolt on conditions keep generating satellite litigation, usually resolved against the drafter. The safe course is rigid compliance with the prescribed contents and no creativity.
Withdrawal has its own discipline: an offer left open can be accepted even after evidence has moved in the offeror’s favour, while a withdrawn offer loses its automatic costs protection entirely. Diarising offers for review at each milestone, disclosure, witness statements, expert reports, is basic hygiene in well-run litigation.
When a party argues the consequences would be unjust, the court looks at the factors in the rule itself: the terms of the offer, the stage it was made, the information available to the parties at the time, the parties’ conduct around providing that information, and whether the offer was a genuine attempt to settle. Sharp practice on disclosure can therefore rescue a refusing party, and a genuine but early offer made on thin information can still earn its full consequences.
In personal injury litigation, Part 36 is also the main gateway through qualified one-way costs shifting: a defendant who beats their own offer can enforce costs against the claimant within the limits the QOCS regime allows, which keeps the mechanism potent even in a costs-protected environment.
Silence is not a strategy.Ignoring a Part 36 offer does not pause it. The relevant period runs, the costs risk crystallises at expiry, and a refusal decision made by default is still a refusal when the judge applies the consequences months later.
Costs-inclusive offers, offers on issues rather than the whole claim, and offers in split trials all carry technical wrinkles worth specialist advice before service, because a defective offer can be worse than none: it signals your number without buying protection.
Timing, Pitch and Tactics
Early offers buy the longest protection: consequences run from expiry of the relevant period, so an offer served with the letter of claim starts the clock before costs balloon. The trade-off is information, since early offers are made on incomplete evidence. Many parties therefore make a protective early offer and refine it after disclosure.
Pitch is judgement. A claimant offer at a modest discount to a realistic best case creates genuine pressure; one at full value creates none. Defendant offers work the same in reverse, and both sides should model the judgment range honestly before choosing a number, because the offer only bites if the trial outcome can plausibly fall short of it.
In fixed-costs territory, including most personal injury and, since 2023, many other claims of moderate value, the consequences are adapted rather than abandoned: beating an offer shifts the case into enhanced percentages of the fixed costs rather than open-ended indemnity assessment. The gearing is smaller but the principle, and the pressure, survive intact.
Receiving an offer should trigger a routine: diarise the expiry immediately, hold a merits conference inside the first week, model best and worst judgment outcomes against the number, and answer formally, whether by acceptance, rejection with reasons, or a counter Part 36 offer that flips the costs risk back onto the offeror. The parties who fare worst at costs hearings are almost always the ones who let the 21 days pass in silence and hoped the problem would age away.
Offers work best laddered. An opening offer establishes protection; a refined offer after disclosure resets it at a sharper number; a final pre-trial offer forces the last decision when the evidence is complete. Each new offer restarts its own relevant period, and each one a tribunal later sees as reasonable deepens the refusing party’s eventual discomfort.
Approval processes deserve planning too: insurers, boards and funders all need time to authorise numbers, and a 21-day window shrinks fast inside a corporate sign-off chain. Building authority in advance, with a pre-agreed range, is what lets a party accept a good offer inside the period instead of paying for a slow yes.
Part 36 also interacts with everything else in the litigation: it sharpens mediation and ADR, because refusing to engage after a credible offer looks unreasonable; it reshapes commercial litigation budgets; and in contract disputes it frequently marks the moment a commercial resolution becomes cheaper than a principled one.
Track the numbers as the case evolves. An offer that was generous before disclosure may be light after it; the winning habit is a standing review of settlement value at every stage, with offers moved deliberately rather than reactively. Court statistics consistently show the overwhelming majority of money claims resolving before trial; Part 36 is the tool that decides on whose terms.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Part 36 offer?
A formal settlement offer under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules. It must be written, state that it is made under Part 36, and give a relevant period of at least 21 days. Refusing one and failing to do better at trial triggers automatic costs and interest consequences.
What happens if I accept a Part 36 offer within 21 days?
The claim settles. In money claims payment is generally due within 14 days, and the defendant pays the claimant’s reasonable costs up to the date of acceptance. Accepting after the relevant period usually adds liability for the other side’s costs from expiry to acceptance.
What happens if a claimant beats their own Part 36 offer?
From expiry of the relevant period the claimant gets indemnity costs, enhanced interest at up to 10% above base rate, and an additional amount of 10% of the first £500,000 of damages and 5% of the next £500,000, capped at £75,000.
What if the claimant fails to beat a defendant’s offer?
The claimant pays the defendant’s costs from expiry of the relevant period, with interest, and loses their own costs for that period, even though they won the case. On substantial claims this routinely consumes much of the judgment sum.
Can a Part 36 offer be withdrawn or changed?
Yes, after the relevant period it can be withdrawn or varied, and within it only with court permission. Withdrawal removes the automatic costs protection, so offers should be reviewed at each evidential milestone rather than left drifting.
Does the judge see the Part 36 offer during trial?
No. Offers are without prejudice save as to costs, so the trial judge only learns of them after deciding the case, when costs fall to be decided. That is when the offer transforms the argument.
Do Part 36 offers work in small claims?
The automatic Part 36 regime does not apply on the small claims track, where recoverable costs are minimal. Formal offers can still be made and may influence limited costs orders for unreasonable behaviour, but the full consequences need fast track or above.
Should I make a Part 36 offer early?
Usually yes, if you can model the claim’s value credibly. Protection runs from expiry of the relevant period, so early offers maximise the period of costs risk transferred to your opponent, and they can be refined as disclosure and expert evidence emerge.
Expert Legal Support
Offers That Bite
Valid, well-pitched Part 36 offers drafted to transfer maximum costs risk.
Receiving an Offer?
Rapid judgment-range modelling so acceptance or refusal is a decision, not a gamble.
Whole-Case Strategy
Offers sequenced with disclosure, ADR and trial preparation for settlement on your terms.
If a Part 36 offer has landed on your desk, or should be leaving it, speak to the litigation team at Connaught Law before the relevant period runs: the clock is the strategy.
The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position. Connaught Law and authors accept no responsibility for loss that may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog. For formal advice on the current law please don't hesitate to contact Connaught Law. Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Connaught Law.
Part 36 Offer UK 2026: Settlement Strategy and Cost Consequences Explained
A Part 36 offer UK 2026 is the settlement tool with real teeth in English civil litigation: a formal offer made under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules that puts the other side’s costs position at risk if they refuse it and fail to do better at trial. Accept within the 21-day relevant period and the case ends on known terms. Refuse, and the refusing party gambles on beating the offer, with indemnity costs, enhanced interest and a capped damages uplift waiting on the wrong side of that bet. This guide explains how the mechanism works, what each outcome costs, and how offers are timed and pitched in practice.
Understanding Part 36 Offers UK 2026
Most civil claims settle, and Part 36 exists to make settlement rational rather than reluctant. It converts an offer to compromise into a formal instrument with automatic, rule-based consequences, so refusing a sensible offer stops being cost-free. Either side can deploy it: claimants to pressure defendants into paying properly, defendants to cap their exposure and transfer risk.
The regime sits in CPR Part 36 and is deliberately self-contained: an offer either complies with its formalities and earns the automatic consequences, or it does not and falls back to being an ordinary offer the court may merely take into account. That difference decides real money, which is why the formalities matter.
What a Part 36 Offer Is and How to Make One
Practitioners usually make offers on the prescribed court form, which walks through every required element, though a compliant letter works equally well. What matters is completeness: each formal requirement present, the scope of the offer unambiguous, and the document dated and served so the relevant period can be counted with certainty.
A valid offer must be in writing, make clear it is made pursuant to Part 36, specify a relevant period of at least 21 days within which the defendant will be liable for the claimant’s costs if accepted, and state whether it relates to the whole claim, part of it, or an issue. Miss one of these and the teeth fall out.
The mechanism is available in almost any civil claim: debt and damages actions, professional negligence, personal injury, contract and property disputes, counterclaims, and even appeals, where fresh offers can be made on appeal-specific terms. Money and non-money claims alike qualify, provided the offer’s terms are capable of acceptance. Straightforward money disputes can begin through the online money claim service, but the offer rules are identical whatever the route in.
Offers are made without prejudice save as to costs: the trial judge does not see them until liability and quantum are decided, at which point they transform the costs argument. Offers can be made before proceedings start, and in money claims an accepted offer must generally be paid within 14 days.
Acceptance is mechanically simple: serve written notice of acceptance while the offer remains open, and before trial no court permission is usually needed. Acceptance stays the proceedings immediately on the offer’s agreed terms, converting a live dispute into an enforceable settlement, which is why authority to accept should be arranged well before the deadline rather than negotiated against it.
Two pieces of small print carry weight. The relevant period is counted from service of the offer, so serving late on a Friday effectively gifts the other side extra thinking time. And costs on acceptance means costs assessed on the standard basis up to the date of acceptance, so an early acceptance keeps that bill short, while a late one grows it daily.
Both sides use the same instrument differently. A claimant’s offer says: pay slightly less than my best case and end this. A defendant’s offer says: take this now, because if the judgment comes in lower, you fund the litigation from the day the offer lapsed. Well-run cases often see competing Part 36 offers refining each other as evidence emerges.
The Cost Consequences, Outcome by Outcome
Acceptance within the relevant period is the clean outcome: the claim ends and the defendant pays the claimant’s reasonable costs up to acceptance. Late acceptance normally adds liability for the other side’s costs from expiry of the relevant period to acceptance, a quietly expensive delay.
Where a claimant beats their own offer at trial, judgment at least as advantageous as the offer, the rewards stack: indemnity-basis costs from expiry, enhanced interest on both damages and costs at up to 10% above base rate, and an additional amount on top of damages of 10% of the first £500,000 and 5% of the next £500,000, capped at £75,000.
Where a claimant fails to beat a defendant’s offer, the claimant, despite winning the case, pays the defendant’s costs from expiry of the relevant period plus interest on those costs, and loses recovery of their own costs for that period. On long trials, that split routinely swallows most of the damages.
Keep the offer clean of costs terms: a compliant Part 36 offer deals with the claim and lets the rules allocate costs, and offers expressed as inclusive of costs generally fall outside the regime altogether. Equally, at least as advantageous means exactly that in money claims: matching the offer to the pound is enough for a claimant to earn the enhanced package.
Worked through, the arithmetic persuades. A claimant offers to accept £80,000; the defendant refuses; judgment lands at £85,000 a year later. The claimant now recovers indemnity costs for that year, interest on damages and costs at up to 10% above base, and an £8,500 additional amount, easily £40,000 to £60,000 of swing on a middling case, all self-inflicted by the refusal.
Reverse it: the defendant offers £50,000, the claimant presses on and wins £40,000. The claimant takes their £40,000 but pays the defendant’s post-expiry costs and forfeits their own for the same period. On a case that ran to trial, the damages cheque frequently changes hands twice, ending mostly with the lawyers on the wrong side of the offer.
Where both sides have live offers, the judgment is measured against each independently: it is entirely possible to beat one and fall short of the other, and the consequences net off accordingly. That is deliberate, and it is why serious litigation is often conducted between two standing offers being nudged as the evidence firms up.
The court retains an escape valve, disapplying consequences where they would be unjust, but the bar is high and honest miscalculation does not clear it. Genuine offers, not tactical shams pitched at 99% of the claim, earn the protection.
Part 36 in the Headlines: Hugh Grant and Prince Harry
Two recent cases put the mechanism on front pages. Hugh Grant settled his privacy claim against News Group Newspapers in 2024 after receiving what he described as an enormous sum, explaining publicly that refusing risked paying both sides’ costs even if he won but recovered less than the offer. The rule, not the merits, drove the endgame.
The Duke of Sussex settled with News Group in January 2025 on similar dynamics, with the offer structure making trial an irrational financial choice however strongly each side believed its case. The lesson for ordinary litigation is identical: a well-pitched Part 36 offer can end even the most entrenched dispute, because it reprices refusal.
Scale down to an ordinary dispute and the same forces apply with sharper teeth, because costs loom larger relative to the sums claimed. In a £60,000 contract claim, six months of post-offer litigation can generate costs exposure rivalling the claim itself, which is why the arrival of a credible, properly served offer so often marks the beginning of the end of the dispute.
Media litigation also shows the deterrent working at scale: with trial costs for each side running into millions, a substantial offer converts every additional week of principle into quantifiable financial exposure, which is precisely what the rule was designed to do.
Neither case is unusual in anything but scale. The same arithmetic ends commercial disputes, professional negligence claims and personal injury cases every week; our civil litigation timeline traces how costs-shifting became the engine of English settlement practice.
Recent Case Law and Common Traps
The recurring disputes are about validity and withdrawal. Offers that muddle the relevant period, purport to exclude interest, or bolt on conditions keep generating satellite litigation, usually resolved against the drafter. The safe course is rigid compliance with the prescribed contents and no creativity.
Withdrawal has its own discipline: an offer left open can be accepted even after evidence has moved in the offeror’s favour, while a withdrawn offer loses its automatic costs protection entirely. Diarising offers for review at each milestone, disclosure, witness statements, expert reports, is basic hygiene in well-run litigation.
When a party argues the consequences would be unjust, the court looks at the factors in the rule itself: the terms of the offer, the stage it was made, the information available to the parties at the time, the parties’ conduct around providing that information, and whether the offer was a genuine attempt to settle. Sharp practice on disclosure can therefore rescue a refusing party, and a genuine but early offer made on thin information can still earn its full consequences.
In personal injury litigation, Part 36 is also the main gateway through qualified one-way costs shifting: a defendant who beats their own offer can enforce costs against the claimant within the limits the QOCS regime allows, which keeps the mechanism potent even in a costs-protected environment.
Costs-inclusive offers, offers on issues rather than the whole claim, and offers in split trials all carry technical wrinkles worth specialist advice before service, because a defective offer can be worse than none: it signals your number without buying protection.
Timing, Pitch and Tactics
Early offers buy the longest protection: consequences run from expiry of the relevant period, so an offer served with the letter of claim starts the clock before costs balloon. The trade-off is information, since early offers are made on incomplete evidence. Many parties therefore make a protective early offer and refine it after disclosure.
Pitch is judgement. A claimant offer at a modest discount to a realistic best case creates genuine pressure; one at full value creates none. Defendant offers work the same in reverse, and both sides should model the judgment range honestly before choosing a number, because the offer only bites if the trial outcome can plausibly fall short of it.
In fixed-costs territory, including most personal injury and, since 2023, many other claims of moderate value, the consequences are adapted rather than abandoned: beating an offer shifts the case into enhanced percentages of the fixed costs rather than open-ended indemnity assessment. The gearing is smaller but the principle, and the pressure, survive intact.
Receiving an offer should trigger a routine: diarise the expiry immediately, hold a merits conference inside the first week, model best and worst judgment outcomes against the number, and answer formally, whether by acceptance, rejection with reasons, or a counter Part 36 offer that flips the costs risk back onto the offeror. The parties who fare worst at costs hearings are almost always the ones who let the 21 days pass in silence and hoped the problem would age away.
Offers work best laddered. An opening offer establishes protection; a refined offer after disclosure resets it at a sharper number; a final pre-trial offer forces the last decision when the evidence is complete. Each new offer restarts its own relevant period, and each one a tribunal later sees as reasonable deepens the refusing party’s eventual discomfort.
Approval processes deserve planning too: insurers, boards and funders all need time to authorise numbers, and a 21-day window shrinks fast inside a corporate sign-off chain. Building authority in advance, with a pre-agreed range, is what lets a party accept a good offer inside the period instead of paying for a slow yes.
Part 36 also interacts with everything else in the litigation: it sharpens mediation and ADR, because refusing to engage after a credible offer looks unreasonable; it reshapes commercial litigation budgets; and in contract disputes it frequently marks the moment a commercial resolution becomes cheaper than a principled one.
Track the numbers as the case evolves. An offer that was generous before disclosure may be light after it; the winning habit is a standing review of settlement value at every stage, with offers moved deliberately rather than reactively. Court statistics consistently show the overwhelming majority of money claims resolving before trial; Part 36 is the tool that decides on whose terms.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Part 36 offer?
A formal settlement offer under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules. It must be written, state that it is made under Part 36, and give a relevant period of at least 21 days. Refusing one and failing to do better at trial triggers automatic costs and interest consequences.
What happens if I accept a Part 36 offer within 21 days?
The claim settles. In money claims payment is generally due within 14 days, and the defendant pays the claimant’s reasonable costs up to the date of acceptance. Accepting after the relevant period usually adds liability for the other side’s costs from expiry to acceptance.
What happens if a claimant beats their own Part 36 offer?
From expiry of the relevant period the claimant gets indemnity costs, enhanced interest at up to 10% above base rate, and an additional amount of 10% of the first £500,000 of damages and 5% of the next £500,000, capped at £75,000.
What if the claimant fails to beat a defendant’s offer?
The claimant pays the defendant’s costs from expiry of the relevant period, with interest, and loses their own costs for that period, even though they won the case. On substantial claims this routinely consumes much of the judgment sum.
Can a Part 36 offer be withdrawn or changed?
Yes, after the relevant period it can be withdrawn or varied, and within it only with court permission. Withdrawal removes the automatic costs protection, so offers should be reviewed at each evidential milestone rather than left drifting.
Does the judge see the Part 36 offer during trial?
No. Offers are without prejudice save as to costs, so the trial judge only learns of them after deciding the case, when costs fall to be decided. That is when the offer transforms the argument.
Do Part 36 offers work in small claims?
The automatic Part 36 regime does not apply on the small claims track, where recoverable costs are minimal. Formal offers can still be made and may influence limited costs orders for unreasonable behaviour, but the full consequences need fast track or above.
Should I make a Part 36 offer early?
Usually yes, if you can model the claim’s value credibly. Protection runs from expiry of the relevant period, so early offers maximise the period of costs risk transferred to your opponent, and they can be refined as disclosure and expert evidence emerge.
Valid, well-pitched Part 36 offers drafted to transfer maximum costs risk.
Rapid judgment-range modelling so acceptance or refusal is a decision, not a gamble.
Offers sequenced with disclosure, ADR and trial preparation for settlement on your terms.
If a Part 36 offer has landed on your desk, or should be leaving it, speak to the litigation team at Connaught Law before the relevant period runs: the clock is the strategy.
Get In TouchDisclaimer:
The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position. Connaught Law and authors accept no responsibility for loss that may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog. For formal advice on the current law please don't hesitate to contact Connaught Law. Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Connaught Law.