9 Park Place - www.9parkplace.co.uk

Welcome to the June edition of the Civil team newsletter.

In this edition both Richard Kember and Robert Vernon provide, from differing standpoints, valuable analysis of the vexed issues arising from the Part 36 procedure; Justin Amos discusses the complex consequences of allocation of track to appeal routes in possession actions; Simon O’Dwyer analyses the recent and on-going saga of the measuring of damages in RTA repair claims and Joseph Edwards gives us a fascinating insight into the latest case law dealing with promptness in judicial review proceedings.

As always, please don’t hesitate to call us to find out more about, or book a place at, any of our upcoming seminars or lectures or if you are interested in us sending you earlier editions of this or our other newsletter/s.

Gareth Thomas


Drafting Part 36 Offers: Getting It Right 
Robert Vernon considers the Court of Appeal’s judgment in PHI Group Limited v Robert West Consulting on the requirements of Part 36 offers

Robert Vernon
Taking promptness seriously: 
Limitation periods in judicial review
Time is of the essence for those seeking judicial review.  CPR 54.5(1) mandates that “the claim form must be filed (a) promptly; and (b) in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose”.

Joseph Edwards
Recent Case on Part 36 offers: a statement of the obvious?

Richard Kember

Coles & Ors v Hetherton & Ors [2012] EWHC 1599

Simon O'Dwyer
Case Note: Routes of Appeal in Possession Claims

Justin Amos

Find out more about our Practice Areas here:

9 Park Place
CF10 3DP

© 2012, 9 Park Place Chambers