Report comment

Besides the very poor drafting of this rule as identified below, and very much a part of the generally sloppy approach is that 36.20 is clearly only concerned with the consequences of late acceptance of a defendant offer - the draftsman quite clearly was not thinking of the effect of late acceptance of a claimant's offer and thus the lacunae. Previous sloppy drafting resulted in the heed for the re-write, which the fails to address another readily identifiable problem. These rules are being drafted by people who have no idea of the practicalities of litigation and seen to be subject to supervision by others who have even less. Of course the rules need rewriting by somebody who actually appreciates what the problems and issues are, subject to overview by similar, then just maybe something useful would appear. And never mind the rules, they can't even get the linguistics right.