without-prejudice-drafter-andrew-bird
Writes a settlement letter on the right footing — and warns you when marking it 'without prejudice' won't actually keep it out of court. A genuine settlement letter is normally protected (the judge can't see it), but only if the substance is a real attempt to settle, and even then there are exceptions. The skill picks the correct footing — without prejudice (WP), without prejudice save as to costs (WPSATC / Calderbank), or open — drafts the finished letter, and surfaces the Unilever v Procter & Gamble exceptions that get WP material admitted despite the label, which a plain template won't flag
npx skills add lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills --skill without-prejudice-drafter-andrew-bird --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# /without-prejudice-drafter 1. Identify the correct footing: open, WP, or WPSATC. 2. Apply the right header convention. WP is not protected just because labelled — the substance must be a genuine settlement attempt in an existing or contemplated dispute. 3. Surface the Unilever exceptions: WP protection is not absolute. 4. Draft accordingly. Keep open and WP material in separate documents. --- # Without prejudice / WPSATC correspondence ## The three footings | Footing | Disclosure at trial | Use | |---|---|---| | **Open** | Yes — fully admissible | Statements of case, demands, pre-action letters not yet in negotiation | | **Without prejudice (WP)** | No — inadmissible to prove liability or quantum | Genuine settlement negotiations | | **Without prejudice save as to costs (WPSATC) / Calderbank** | Inadmissible on liability/quantum; intended to be **admissible on costs** after judgment | Settlement offers where the offeror wants costs protection but cannot use CPR Part 36 (e.g. Employment Tribunal) or wants Calderbank flexibility | Labelling a letter WPSATC signals the intended footing; it does not by itself secure costs protection. Whether the court reads the letter on costs, and w
- The three footings
- When WP protection applies
- The Unilever exceptions (Unilever v Procter & Gamble [2000])
- Calderbank / WPSATC specifics
- Drafting rules
- Workflow
- Step 1 — Confirm footing
- Step 2 — Confirm dispute
- Step 3 — Draft
- Step 4 — Surface exceptions
- Output
- Without Prejudice — sections to produce
- Without Prejudice Save As To Costs — sections to produce
- Markers
What does the without-prejudice-drafter-andrew-bird skill do?
Writes a settlement letter on the right footing — and warns you when marking it 'without prejudice' won't actually keep it out of court. A genuine settlement letter is normally protected (the judge can't see it), but only if the substance is a real attempt to settle, and even then there are exceptions. The skill picks the correct footing — without prejudice (WP), without prejudice save as to costs (WPSATC / Calderbank), or open — drafts the finished letter, and surfaces the Unilever v Procter & Gamble exceptions that get WP material admitted despite the label, which a plain template won't flag
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills --skill without-prejudice-drafter-andrew-bird --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills, a repository with 618 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.