Settlement and settling disputes

Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis

Many disputes are settled. We have produced several Practice Notes and Precedents to guide you through the process of considering and conducting settlement negotiations, making different kinds of offer to settle, and drafting and interpreting settlement agreements.

For detailed guidance and Precedents on Part 36 offers, see: Part 36 offers—overview. For detailed guidance on the various forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), including mediation, see: ADR and dispute resolution clauses—overview and Mediation—overview and related content.

The need to seek to settle disputes

Integral to a dispute resolution lawyer’s work is achieving the settlement of disputes. In addition to the client’s own internal drivers such as relationship preservation and avoiding wasting management time, there are civil justice system drivers, not least of which are costs pressures and penalties, working to encourage parties to at least attempt to settle their disputes.

For detailed guidance on why you should actively consider settlement prospects when advising your clients with disputes, when settlement may be possible and should certainly be considered, including the consequences of failing to engage in settlement attempts, see Practice Notes:

  1. •

    Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Dispute Resolution News

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—12 February 2026

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes: analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the 193rd Practice Direction update and the Court of Appeal decision in South Bank Hotel Management Company Ltd v Galliard Hotels Ltd (limitation); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

Without notice orders under the Chabra jurisdiction and the gateways for permission to serve out of the jurisdiction (Gilbert v Broadoak)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case concerns a worldwide freezing order (WFO) which had been obtained on a without notice basis as against two overseas third parties under the Chabra jurisdiction. At the return hearing, the freezing order was discharged by the High Court, on the basis that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over the respondents. The judge held that none of the jurisdictional gateways within CPR PD 6B, para 3.1 applied. As such, and even though there was evidence to the effect that there was a risk of dissipation of funds, the lack of jurisdiction was decisive and led to the discharge of the WFO. The court also considered that there were breaches of the duty of fair presentation at the without notice hearing, but that these were not sufficient in themselves to justify discharging and not continuing (or reimposing) the order. Written by Georgia Whiting, legal counsel (contentious construction), Capita.

Minutes of the OPR Committee meeting—17 November 2025

The minutes of the Online Procedure Rule Committee (OPRC) meeting of 17 November 2025 (conducted in a hybrid format at The Rolls Building (Royal Courts of Justice) and via video conference) cover a number of issues including feedback from the committee’s open meeting, prioritisation of work on the draft Inclusion Framework, possible expansion of the OPRC’s rulemaking powers (including proposals relating to online civil money and damages claims), property and possession rule development (including paper forms for non-digital users), and an update on Residential Property Tribunal digitisation and service coherence.

Court of Appeal confirms narrow scope for post-limitation substitution in wrong defendant cases (Adcamp LLP v Office Properties)

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Court of Appeal has ruled that CPR 19.6(3)(b) does not permit substitution of defendants after expiry of the relevant limitation period where such substitution would change the essential facts necessary to establish liability against the substituted defendant. The claimants (respondents in the appeal) had issued proceedings against firms which had acquired the alleged wrongdoers, believing that any liabilities had been transferred. When it emerged (or was at least disputed) that liabilities had not been transferred, they sought to add or substitute the predecessor firm after limitation had expired. The Court of Appeal concluded that CPR 19.6(3)(b) was not engaged since the substitution would change the claim in substance, as an essential element of the case against the original defendant (the pleaded basis for the acquiring firm’s liability) would be replaced by the primary liability claim against the substituted defendant. It was, in effect, a different claim against a different party. The Court of Appeal was clear that any perceived harshness this might cause to claimants could not be mitigated by adopting a broad reading of CPR 19.6(3)(b). Rather, it considered the problem (if any) was caused by earlier binding Court of Appeal authority which had confined the ‘mistake’ gateway in CPR 19.6(3)(a) to errors of name (misnomer) and excluded cases of mistaken legal responsibility/liability (identity). Any solution, if required, would therefore be a matter for the Supreme Court.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?

Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?This Practice Note considers when and why you should attempt to settle disputes and the consequences for not attempting to reach settlement if directed to attempt it.For guidance on who should be involved in settlement discussions, what form the settlement

Will acceptance of part payment of an outstanding debt made expressly in full and final settlement result

Will acceptance of part payment of an outstanding debt made expressly in full and final settlement result in a binding settlement of the entire claim with the result that the claimant cannot pursue the defendant for the balance of the debt due?For the purposes of this Q&A it is assumed that one

Is a settlement agreement legally binding as a contract if there is no consideration in the agreement?

Is a settlement agreement legally binding as a contract if there is no consideration in the agreement?For the purposes of this Q&A, we have focussed on agreements to refrain from instituting or continuing proceedings eg under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) which satisfies the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some
Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?

Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?

Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?This Practice Note considers when and why you should attempt to settle disputes and the consequences for not attempting to reach settlement if directed to attempt it.For guidance on who should be involved in settlement discussions, what form the settlement

Will acceptance of part payment of an outstanding debt made expressly in full and final settlement result

Will acceptance of part payment of an outstanding debt made expressly in full and final settlement result

Will acceptance of part payment of an outstanding debt made expressly in full and final settlement result in a binding settlement of the entire claim with the result that the claimant cannot pursue the defendant for the balance of the debt due?For the purposes of this Q&A it is assumed that one

Is a settlement agreement legally binding as a contract if there is no consideration in the agreement?

Is a settlement agreement legally binding as a contract if there is no consideration in the agreement?

Is a settlement agreement legally binding as a contract if there is no consideration in the agreement?For the purposes of this Q&A, we have focussed on agreements to refrain from instituting or continuing proceedings eg under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) which satisfies the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some