- What makes a Part 36 offer ‘unjust’? (Invista Textiles (UK) Ltd v Botes)
- What are the practical implications for the case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: In a recent costs judgment on a breach of confidence case, it was determined by Mr Justice Birss that the claimant’s Part 36 offer made to the defendants had not been made as a genuine attempt to settle the proceedings and therefore that it would be ‘unjust’ to award the Part 36 costs consequences under CPR 36.17(4). His judgment provides an illustration of the application of the ‘genuine attempt to settle’ requirement of CPR 36.17(5)(e). Written by Philip Partington, Director at Virtuoso Legal LLP, who acted for the defendants.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial