Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

PART 36: The devil’s in the detail

01 February 2013  

Matthew Evans examines recent case law on the technical requirements of Part 36

Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules offers parties valuable costs protection, and can put pressure on them to settle. The recent Court of Appeal case of F&C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy [2012] is a reminder that parties need to be aware (and advised) of the technical requirements of Part 36. This article examines Part 36, and analyses the impact of F&C Alternative Investments. We also briefly examine another Court of Appeal case on the subject: Gibbon v Manchester City Council [2010]. Both Gibbon and F&C Alternative Investments reflect the court’s strong view that formal requirements matter when it comes to making a Part 36 offer.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    F&C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd & ors v Barthelemy & anor [2012] EWCA Civ 843

    Gibbon v Manchester City Council [2010] EWCA Civ 726