Lucinda Hawthorn’s Post

View profile for Lucinda Hawthorn, graphic
Lucinda Hawthorn

Solicitor at Twelve Tabulae

Are all equal before the law? The settlement of Grant’s case against Murdoch demonstrates that the rich can buy their way out of trouble. CPR Part 36 offers are designed to encourage litigants to settle claims before going to trial. They allow the court to impose financial consequences on the party who refuses a Part 36 offer if the outcome at trial is less advantageous to them than the offer that they refused. If a Defendant has a bottomless pit of money, they can effectively buy out the Claimant by making an offer that is so artificially high in comparison to the value of the case, that the Claimant will face punitive measures imposed by the court for refusing it. This helps to reduce the pressure on the courts, but also allows Defendants to keep secret their wrongdoing. Many claims are (wisely or not) brought on a matter of principle and for the Claimant the day in open court is often the most important thing: to be able to question and expose the alleged wrongdoer and have a judge validate their experience and sanction the Defendant. But the availability of Part 36 offers puts this into jeopardy particularly when facing a better-funded opponent. If justice must be seen to be done, does there need to be any change to the system to introduce more transparency, particularly in a case such as this? Or should it be acceptable that the rich and powerful will never be held accountable so long as they can afford to make an offer that the Claimant can’t refuse? https://lnkd.in/eCsyQbWR #CivilLitigation #Part36 #Murdoch #Grant #transparency

To view or add a comment, sign in

More Relevant Posts

Lucinda Hawthorn

270 followers

View Profile

Explore topics