Compromise is a subject which should be dear to the hearts of all litigation lawyers, but is apparently anathema to some. From a client’s point of view, a well negotiated settlement of a dispute is usually worth far more than the roulette-like spectacle of the trial plus attendant appeals. Some litigators, however, treat all talk of compromise as a show of weakness, and build their “reputations” on never settling. They are the “bovver boys” of the law, always spoiling for a fight at someone else’s expense. Should you find yourself in litigation with one of these legal headbangers, this book will be of little assistance, except as a weapon in hand-to-hand skirmishes outside court. But for the great majority of litigators, this book will bring welcome relief. Compromises often bob up over the horizon at the most surprising (and usually inconvenient) moments and it is essential to have to hand a useful vade mecum of legal and practical advice.

This book fills that need. It is a somewhat expanded new edition of a book first published in 1980. It covers all areas of the law relating to compromise (which is largely, though not entirely, that of the law of contract), and gives much practical guidance as well. It also contains a useful series of precedents. In general, the text is comprehensive and supported by copious citation of authority, but the author does not hesitate to express a different view where appropriate, or to suggest an answer where authority provides none.

The only serious shortcoming with the book that this reviewer has been able to find is that it deals rather more with matrimonial and general common law litigation than with Chancery or commercial matters, and the practice in the latter is by no means always the same. That said, the author is to be congratulated on his achievement, and the book can be warmly recommended to all lawyers who have to deal with litigation.