Office: +44 203 968 0500
24/7 Emergency Response: +44 7887 710 950
Select Page

The benefits of making a carefully considered claimants’ Part 36 offer!

 

The benefits of making a carefully considered claimants’ Part 36 offer| BDM Blog | BDM Law

It’s not often we find ourselves commenting on construction cases, but one recent case (1) is a reminder of the benefits of making an early claimants’ Part 36 offer.

Firstly, a reminder of what Part 36 offers are for those of you who might not be familiar with them. These are offers made under the Court rules. They can be made either by claimants or defendants. The purpose is to persuade the other party to settle the claim at an early stage before legal costs escalate. There are potential penalties if a party fails to accept a Part 36 offer which the Court determines they should have accepted. When it comes to a claimants’ Part 36 offer (which is an offer to accept a certain sum of money), if the offer is not accepted by the defendant and the claimant successfully obtains damages for more than the offer, then the claimant can be awarded enhanced interest on the claim, indemnity costs and even a further monetary sum by way of a penalty.

Turning to the recent case, the claimant builders made an early Part 36 offer of £875,000 including interest. That offer could have been accepted but the defendants chose not to accept it. At trial the claimants were successful and were awarded £802,475 plus interest of £77,372 i.e. a total of £879,847. They therefore beat the Part 36 offer by just £4,847.

In view of the above, the claimants returned to Court on the issue of costs. The defendants asked for issue based or proportional costs, arguing that the claimants only won on one head of claim and they only just beat their Part 36 offer. The judge declined to depart from the Part 36 regime and said that this was a clear case of a claimant beating its Part 36 offer and, as such, it was not unjust to apply the Part 36 consequences. The judge ordered the defendant to pay indemnity costs from the last date for acceptance of the Part 36 offer (“the relevant period”), interest on those costs and additional interest on the damages claim at 6.5% above base rate plus a monetary penalty of £65,000.

It can be seen from the above that Part 36 offers are powerful weapons. However, it is essential that such offers are carefully considered and pitched at the correct level. Part 36 offers must also be accurately worded to comply with the Court rules or they may be regarded as being invalid.

We are often asked if Part 36 offers can be retracted or revised. In short, there are issues with retracting an offer whilst the relevant period for acceptance is running. However, if the relevant period for acceptance has expired, then the offer can be retracted or it can be made on terms where it is automatically retracted. It is also possible to make revised offers which would trigger a new relevant period for acceptance with costs consequences running from the end of that new period. Past offers can also be left open for acceptance until specifically withdrawn. In theory, multiple Part 36 offers could be open for acceptance at any one time.

We would urge anyone considering making or accepting a Part 36 offer to take legal advice as this is a potentially complex area of the law and the scope for making errors is considerable.

Finally, we are often approached by clients who are under the impression that the Part 36 regime is available in arbitration. It is not. Arbitrators have a wide discretion to make costs orders under the governing rules of the arbitration or under the Arbitration Act 1996. In certain cases they may consider sealed offers made at an early stage when it comes to exercising that discretion but they do not have the same powers as judges making costs orders under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

(1) Hochtief (UK) Construction Ltd & Anor v Atkins Ltd [2019] EWHC 3028 (TCC)

BDM is a specialist shipping law firm offering high quality legal advice and representation at a reasonable price. Please follow us on social media by clicking below.

Other Recent Blogs

  • Tendering NOR does wirelessinclude email | BDM Blog | BDM Law
    November 21, 2022

    Tendering NOR – does “wireless” include email?

    In a recent arbitration under the LMAA Small Claims Procedure (1) the Tribunal had to determine the validity of a Notice of Readiness (“NOR”) which had been tendered by email. The NOR is one of the most important documents for ship owners because it acts as a trigger to [...]

    Read more >
  • Delivery without original bills – an example of what can go wrong | BDM Blog | BDM Law
    November 7, 2022

    Delivery without original bills – an example of what can go wrong

    Readers of our blog may recall an article we released back in November 2020 in which we highlighted the risks that a ship owner is required to undertake when accepting a letter of indemnity (LOI) in exchange for releasing the cargo without the production of an original bill [...]

    Read more >
  • Supreme Court gives permission to appeal in The Polar | BDM Blog | BDM Law
    October 31, 2022

    Supreme Court gives permission to appeal in “The Polar”

    We previously reported on the High Court and Court of Appeal’s decisions in one of the last Somali ransom cases still in the Court system. The Court of Appeal held that a war risks provision in a charterparty did not constitute an agreement that the owners would not claim [...]

    Read more >
+44 203 968 0500
+44 7887 710 950