Offer to settle meaning

When to seek settlement? This checklist flags common issues that can emerge when negotiating and drafting a settlement agreement. For step-by-step guidance on negotiating and preparing a settlement agreement, consult the following Practice Notes: How to agree and draft a settlement agreement (non-employment claims) Settling disputes—how to document a settlement Settling disputes—drafting the settlement agreement Keep settlement in mind at every stage of a dispute, including pre-action. Consider the full range of resolution routes, such as direct negotiation between the parties or their legal advisers, assessing whether a Part 36 offer is suitable, or engaging in assisted alternative dispute resolution (ADR), for example mediation. Following a rule change in October 2024, the court may now order parties to participate in ADR (see CPR 3.1(2)(o)). Review any contractual duties relating to settlement—such as a tiered dispute resolution clause—and ensure compliance with pre-action protocol requirements that encourage and facilitate settlement efforts. For additional context, see: Settling disputes—what, when and why settle?...

On 26 September 2024, the Court of Appeal threw out two joined appeals, each arising from typical PPI misselling disputes where a customer had submitted a written claim and was then offered a smaller amount by the bank. The court decided that Santander Cards’ redress letter to Christine Self made plain that the offer, if taken up, would be a full and final settlement 'of this and any other claims' against the bank. In the separate matter involving Skipton and customer Jason Harrop, the court likewise found there had been a 'consensual offer and acceptance of a lesser sum' that can only be understood as an offer to compromise and settle. Justice Jeremy Stuart-Smith also rejected Self’s assertion that Santander was already obliged, under the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) dispute resolution complaints procedures, to pay compensation. According to the 26 September 2024 decision, her stance would have meant there was no consideration for her agreement with Santander, that it was not legally binding, and that she could bring further claims...

As patent disputes multiply, and court rulings on FRAND licence rates for SEPs diverge, attention is shifting to aggregate royalty depositories to provide prospective patent licensees with greater certainty about future outlay. Such depositories offer manufacturers a transparent estimate of the fees for licensing the range of SEPs underpinning a particular standard, for example 5G connectivity in vehicles. In turn, this can head off costly litigation where an SEP owner and licensee differ over a FRAND valuation for the patents. A depository is unlike a patent pool: it is not exclusively driven by patent holders and more reliably assures that its coverage spans the complete suite of SEPs required for the relevant standard. Though long mooted and not yet implemented, aggregate royalty depositories would see an independent expert panel determine the SEPs necessary for a given standard and settle on an aggregate figure that technology developers could trust. First floated within the EU’s now-scrapped SEP Regulation proposal, the idea is again being reconsidered by businesses and industry bodies as one...

Matiere SAS (a company incorporated under the laws of France) v ABM Precast Solutions Ltd [2025] EWHC 2030 (TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment signals scope for a more adaptable approach to consequential relief where a Part 36 offer is bettered at trial, yet the court is not persuaded that the offer represented a genuine effort to settle the proceedings in their entirety. It sets out the appropriate course where a Part 36 proposal authentically seeks to resolve a claim within the proceedings but, in substance, overlooks a substantially higher-value counterclaim pursued in the same action. The court rejects the suggestion that the enhanced cost consequences under Part 36 operate on an all-or-nothing basis, and accepts that it is both permissible and suitable to confer the enhanced consequences on the claim while directing that the counterclaim’s costs in the same proceedings are recoverable only on the standard basis. In effect, the decision delineates a differentiated outcome, separating the treatment of claim and counterclaim...

ARCHIVED: this Practice Note is archived, not kept up to date, and provided for background reference only. Moreover, some links may no longer point to the provisions as they stood on the date this Practice Note’s guidance was published. Key Part 36 cases 2016—what do you need to know? Although the updated Part 36 took effect a little over 18 months ago, intending to ease interpretative difficulties in a scheme designed to encourage settlement (and thereby save court time), problems under Part 36 remain. The position through 2016 is unchanged, with recurring issues continuing to arise despite the revisions...

The point at which an agreement is concluded—absence of ‘subject to contract’ This Practice Note examines the issues that may arise in deciding when a binding settlement of a dispute has been reached, if at all. For guidance on enforcing settlement agreements, see Practice Notes: Enforcing settlement agreements concluded after proceedings have commenced and Enforcing a settlement agreement concluded pre-action. A settlement agreement is made where negotiations over disputed matters are followed by acceptance of an offer, supported by consideration, with an intention to create legal relations. To be contractually binding, the settlement must clearly show: acceptance of an offer—being the final and unequivocal assent to that offer assent that mirrors the terms proposed in the offer communication of that acceptance to the offeror Be alert to the risk of accepting an offer despite intending to continue negotiations. For help on avoiding this, see Practice Notes: Settling disputes—who, confidentiality and subject to contract; and Settling disputes—how to document a...

The basis of an FM contract When embarking on a facilities management (FM) agreement, there is much to weigh up and settle (see Diagram: What does a Facilities Management contract look like). As with any contractual arrangement, a valid offer, unequivocal acceptance, and sufficient consideration are necessary for it to be legally binding. Issuing an initial invitation to tender for FM services typically does not amount to an 'offer' in the legal sense—the FM contractor’s submission is usually the first 'offer', and the talks that follow are, in essence, counter-offers in this specific context. As...

ARCHIVED: [ insert name and address of claimant’s legal representative ] [ insert date ] Without prejudice save as to costs Dear [ insert organisation name ] [ Pre-action ] Part 36 offer [ Claimant v Defendant[ —Case number ] ] We write in relation to the above [ potential ] matter, in which we represent [ insert name of your client ]. [ Our client is satisfied that your client’s claim cannot be sustained OR Our client wishes to resolve this issue amicably OR Our client recognises the requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules for parties to seek to settle their disputes ], and we are instructed to advance an offer pursuant to Part 36 of the CPR ('the Offer'). For the avoidance of doubt, the Offer is made with the intention that the consequences set out in Section I of Part 36 shall apply...

Note: This Precedent does not address in any way CPR 36 rules that apply solely to fixed costs cases. For guidance on Part 36 offers in fixed costs cases, refer to Practice Notes: Part 36 offers—fixed costs (position prior to 1 October 2023) and Part 36 offers—fixed costs (position on or after 1 October 2023). Private and confidential [ Insert name and address of addressee ] [ insert date ] Dear [ insert name of client—claimant ] [ Insert case heading ] Further to our discussion, I have now received a ‘Part 36 offer’ from [ insert name of defendant ], and I enclose herewith a copy. This letter is intended to assist you in deciding whether to accept the proposal; accordingly, I have set out below what a Part 36 offer is, what the defendant has proposed to you, and the potential consequences of accepting or declining it. [ After reading this letter, please contact me promptly so that we can discuss matters further and help...

Note: This precedent does not include CPR 36 provisions that concern fixed costs cases specifically. For details on Part 36 offers in fixed costs matters, see Practice Notes: Part 36 offers—fixed costs (position prior to 1 October 2023) and Part 36 offers—fixed costs (position on or after 1 October 2023). Private & confidential [ insert name and address of addressee ] [ insert date ] Dear [ insert name of client: defendant ] [ insert case heading ] As discussed [ insert when you had the discussion ], I have received a Part 36 settlement proposal from [ insert name of claimant ], and enclose a copy. To help you decide whether to accept, I outline below what a Part 36 offer is, what the claimant is proposing, and the implications of accepting or refusing this offer. [ Once you have reviewed this letter, please contact me promptly so we can talk it through and assist you in deciding how to respond to...