SEARCH PLAN (a) Problem: Employee [JL] making a claim for PI against her employer [BSP]. She wants to ensure she is protected against costs. (b) Facts: JL rejected BSP’s Part 36 Offer. JL refuses to renegotiate despite being invited to make a counter-offer by BSP. (c) Issues: Whether JL’s conduct will prejudice her right to claim costs if (a) judgement is significantly greater than BSP’s Part 36 offer; or, (b) judgement is only slightly greater than BSP’s Part 36 offer. (d)(i) Keyword: ‘Part 36 Offer’ Æ’ Source: Halsbury’s Law Æ’ Findings: The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Statutory Instrument 1998 No. 3132 L.17. (ii) Keywords: ‘Cost implications of Part 36 Offer’, ‘Refusal of Part 36 Offer’ Æ’ Source: West Law Æ’ Findings: Lisa Carver v BAA Plc  EWCA Civ 412. Part 2:
SEARCH PLAN (a) Problem: Solicitor working for GS, free of charge, in a defamation claim against GH. (b) Facts: Solicitor has asked to be advised on whether or not a costs award will be granted in favour of GS if he wins his case. (c) Issues: Can a pro bono solicitor ever recover his costs from a successful litigation? (d)(i) Keyword: ‘Pro Bono’ Æ’ Source: Halsbury’s Law Æ’ Findings: The Legal Services Act 2007, s194.
A professional writer will make a clear, mistake-free paper for you!Get help with your assigment
Please check your inbox
I'm Chatbot Amy :)
I can help you save hours on your homework. Let's start by finding a writer.Find Writer