Legal News

In brief: Costs apportioned following late acceptance of a Part 36 offer (Optical Express & Ors v Associated Newspapers Limited)

Published on: 08 November 2017
Published by: LexisPSL
  • In brief: Costs apportioned following late acceptance of a Part 36 offer (Optical Express & Ors v Associated Newspapers Limited)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was this case about?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: Paul Bonner Hughes, associate at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, considers the case of Optical Express Ltd & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd, in which the High Court held, for the first time, that it would be ‘unjust’ to follow the ‘default’ rule in CPR 36.13(5), according to which a claimant who accepts a Part 36 offer after the deadline for acceptance recovers its costs on a standard basis up to the date on which the deadline for acceptance expired, and the defendant recovers its costs on a standard basis from that date until the date of acceptance. The court held that the claimants could and should have provided the defendant with details of their alleged losses far earlier, and that the claimants were thus entitled to recover their costs only up to the date on which the deadline for acceptance would have expired had they done so. The court also held that the claimants’ conduct in respect of the offer was ‘highly unreasonable’, and that the defendant was thus entitled to recover its costs on an indemnity basis from the date on which the deadline for acceptance expired. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents