CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST WHEN GIVING EVIDENCE ABOUT A BICYCLE
My attention has recently been drawn to the judgment of HHJ Ralton in Darnley -v- Cornish 2021 WL 04760420. The judge, on appeal, overturned a finding that a claimant, who had misled the court as to ownership of a bicycle…
WEBINARS ON KEEPING YOUR COOL: UNDERSETTLEMENT, PROCEDURAL PITFALLS AND LIMITATION PROBLEMS: AVOIDING MATTERS HEATING UP WHEN THE HEATWAVE IS OVER
In September I am presenting a number of webinars with the theme of “avoiding problems”. These are avoiding undersettlement: avoiding procedural pitfalls and avoiding problems with limitation. “AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: A GUIDE FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS” 19th September 2022 …
NINE YEARS ON V: 2018: THE GARDEN THAT COST A LOT: CLAIMANTS SOUGHT £360,000 – AND RECEIVED NOTHING… EXCEPT A BILL FOR £2 MILLION
A prominent QC tweeted recently that, when he was waiting for a court judgment to be delivered, his greatest fear was that the case would end up in the “Proving Things” series on this blog. Today we look a post…
NINE YEARS ON 1: SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW”: IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THE IMPECUNIOUS AND UNINSURED DEFENDANT?
People were very kind about the 9th anniversary of the blog. I have decided to extend the celebrations slightly by taking a post from each of the nine years. This was the second ever post on the 25th June 2013. …
THE REDUCTION OF A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT: RELEVANT CALDERBANK OFFERS CONSIDERED: RECOVERABLE COSTS REDUCED BY 15% AND 60%
In Mathieu v Hinds & Anor (No. 2: Costs) [2022] EWHC 1624 (QB) Mrs Justice Hill reduced a claimant’s recoverable costs. An initial 10% reduction was made because of the pursuit of a claim for provisional damages which was not…
SIMMONS -V- CASTLE 10% UPLIFT APPLIES TO DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF REPAIRING COVENTANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In Khan v Mehmood [2022] EWCA Civ 791 the Court of Appeal held that the 10% uplift in s.44(6) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 applied to damages for breach of a repairing covenant. “……
DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH: WHEN THERE IS A REDUCED LIFE EXPECTANCY: WEBINAR 21st JUNE 2022
This webinar looks at the difficult, but important, issue of how the courts award damages when a claimant has reduced life expectancy as a result of their injuries. Booking details available here. TOPICS TO BE COVERED What is the…
THE CHILD CLAIMANT AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION: WEBINAR 15th JUNE 2022
This webinar looks at the problems and issues faced by a child who has suffered the loss of parents or carers. It looks at the position when children are the sole claimants, have a dependency claim as part of a…
THE COMPENSATION RECOVERY UNIT, LISTED AND UNLISTED BENEFITS
I gave a webinar earlier today in relation to deductions from damages. One of the issues considered was the problems caused by Universal Credit. There is an important distinction, in law, between “listed” benefits – which are subject to CRU…
DEDUCTIONS FROM PERSONAL INJURIES DAMAGES AND CURRENT ISSUES WITH CRU: WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2022
This webinar looks at issues relating to deductions from damages, it will also cover recent issues relating to mitigation of loss. Booking details are available here. TOPICS TO BE COVERED Non-CRU benefits and deduction from damages What is the…
PROVING THINGS 231: ASSESSING LOSS OF EARNINGS OF AN ARTIST: THE WIDE PALETTE OF APPROACHES THE COURT CAN TAKE
There are many cases where the courts have had to consider the loss of earnings of a claimant whose career pattern, and thus earnings, are not wholly certain. Often these relate to those working in sports or entertainment. In Mathieu…
PROVING THINGS 229: WHO BEARS THE BURDEN OF PROOF WHEN A CLAIMANT SEEKS DAMAGES GROSS OF TAXATION
We are returning for the second, but not the last, time to the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mathieu v Hinds & Anor [2022] EWHC 924 (QB). The judge awarded an injured claimant damages for loss of earnings gross of tax. …
PROVING THINGS 228: PLEADING AND PROVING MITIGATION OF LOSS: THE NEED FOR A DEFENDANT TO ESTABLISH A “CONCRETE CASE”
The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mathieu v Hinds & Anor [2022] EWHC 924 (QB) is interesting for a large number of reasons. Here we look at the judgment in relation to pleading and proving mitigation of loss. “A…
PROVING THINGS 227: FAILURE TO PROVE A DEBT CLAIM: “THE PROOF REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO THE SUMS WHICH IT CLAIMS IS SADLY LACKING”
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Emery Planning Partnership Ltd v Bevan [2022] EWHC 494 (QB) illustrates a failure by a claimant to prove a debt claim. It is (yet another) object lesson that facts and evidence are needed…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 14th MARCH 2022
There are 5 million self-employed people in the United Kingdom making up 15.5% of the workforce. A self-employed person (including directors of small companies) face particular difficulties when seeking to recover loss of earnings after being injured. Similarly those who…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 7th MARCH 2022
The “Proving Things” series on this blog often looks at cases relating to loss of income. Recent cases on this topic are explored in a webinar on the 7th March 2022: Claims for Loss of Earnings: Learning from Recent Cases,…
“I FIND THAT THE CLAIM WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE CLAIMANT’S LAWYERS ON A PREMISE WHICH WAS IRRELEVANT AND WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE OR THE LAW”: WHY MUCH MORE CARE IS NEEDED IN DRAFTING SCHEDULES
We are looking again at the decision in Cojanu v Essex Partnership University NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 197 (QB). This time at the judgment in relation to quantum. The case involved a situation where the claimant’s lawyers presentation of the case…
PROVING THINGS 224: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE IMPORTANCE (& LIMITATIONS) OF THE CLAIMANT’S OWN EVIDENCE
The impairment of someone’s ability to earn their living is always a serious matter. There are a number of approaches that the court can take to the award of damages. Anyone representing a claimant should read McRae -v- Chase International…
PROVING THINGS 223: PROVING A SUBSTANTIAL LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM (£1,206,053 TO BE EXACT)
In Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB) Anthony Metzer QC (sitting as Deputy High Court Judge) awarded a claimant £1,206,053) in loss of earnings. The judge found that the approach in Smith -v- Manchester was not an…
A CLAIMANT IS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST WHEN THEY DON’T PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT IS NOT ASKED FOR: JUDGMENT FOR £1,679,406 IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE
In Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB) Anthony Metzer QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) rejected an argument that a claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. Judgment was entered for £1,679.406 instead of a finding of…
PROVING THINGS 221: THE COURT WILL NOT SPECULATE
In Hirst & Anor v Dunbar & Ors [2022] EWHC 41 (TCC) Mr Justice Eyre highlighted the need for a claimant to prove losses, and expenditure, the court will not speculate on items relating to expenditure. “In my judgement…
WRONGFULLY ENTERING JUDGMENT GIVES RISE TO A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR A DEFENDANT: THE TORT OF ABUSE OF PROCESS
In Total Extraction Ltd v Aircentric Ltd [2021] EW Misc 21 (CC) District Judge Branchflower found that a claimant that had wrongfully entered judgment on admission was liable in damages to the defendant that had suffered losses as a result. …
THE NEED FOR A CLAIMANT TO PROVE INJURY: WITHOUT EVIDENCE THE ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT
The earlier post on proving causation highlights the matters that claimants need to prove when bringing a claim for damages. One essential element is that a claimant needs to prove damages. One case that shows a clear illustration of this…
PROVING DAMAGES: WEBINAR 25th NOVEMBER 2021
At the moment there are 217 individual posts in the “Proving Things” series on this blog. Many, if not most, of the posts relate to a failure by a party to prove a crucial piece of their case at trial….
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: A CLAIM FOR SERVICES CAN BE BASED ON THE COSTS OF COMMERCIAL REPLACEMENT – WITHOUT DISCOUNT
The Court of Appeal decision in Steve Hill Ltd v Witham [2021] EWCA Civ 1312 contains an important consideration of the basis upon which claims for loss of services are calculated in a fatal accident case. FATAL ACCIDENT -…
SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO DEFENDANT: DAMAGES WERE “DE MINIMIS”: THE LAW WILL NOT SUPPLY A REMEDY WHEN NO HARM HAS CREDIBLY BEEN SHOWN
In Rolfe & Ors v Veale Wasbrough Vizards LLP [2021] EWHC 2809 (QB) Master MCCloud granted the defendant summary judgment in an action for breach of data. “There is no credible case that distress or damage over a de minimis…
FATAL ACCIDENTS: DAY LONG (ONLINE) COURSE ON LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: 12TH NOVEMBER 2021
Alongside solicitor Hilary Wetherell I am presenting a day long course: Fatal Accidents: Law, Practice, Procedure and Compassion 2021. It is an online course on the 12th November 2021. Booking details are available here. THE COURSE This one day virtual course will take…
WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for bringing my attention to the decision of HHJ Jarman QC in Akram v Aviva Insurance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 16 (CC). This is a case that highlights the flexibility the courts have…
INTERIM PAYMENTS: THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
Later today I am presenting a webinar on interim payments. It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss all possible permutations in relation to interim payments during a one hour slot and this post supplements the webinar. Here we look…
JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO ORDER DEFENDANT TO FACE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
There is another aspect of the judgment in Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) that needs consideration. The judgment on fundamental dishonesty was considered in the previous post. The defendant was unsuccessful in their appeal against the…
EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) Mr Justice Jacobs rejected an appeal from a defendant that argued the trial judge should have found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. “The Defendant’s argument, based on the word…
SUING AN IMPECUNIOUS DEFENDANT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S INSURANCE POLICY…
Every couple of years I repost the second post ever on this blog -“suing the man of straw”. The points made remain a surprise to many. An injured claimant may be able to recover unpaid damages from their own insurer….
PROVING THINGS 216: THE DANGERS OF RELYING ON EXPERT REPORT TO PROVE VALUE
There are some similarities between the case of Serene Construction Ltd v Salata and Associates Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2433 (Ch) and the previous post in this series. In both cases the claimant’s case related to the valuation of…
PROVING THINGS 215: CLAIM £8.7 MILLION IN DAMAGES BUT RECOVER NOTHING: NOT SO MUCH A CASE OF EXPERT SHOPPING BUT EXPERTS ON SHOPPING CENTRES
We have looked before at the judgment of HHJ Hodge (sitting as a High Court judge) in Ahuja Investments Ltd v Victorygame Ltd & Anor (CONTRACT – Purchase of commercial investment property) [2021] EWHC 2382 (Ch). It is worth noting that…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS WIDOW’S CLAIM TO DAMAGES BASED ON “PRACTICAL REALITY”
In Paramount Shopfitting Company Ltd v Rix [2021] EWCA Civ 1172 the Court of Appeal rejected a defendant’s appeal in relation to the assessment of damages awarded to a widow. The widow’s husband had run a successful business. The fact that…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND COUNTER-ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th JULY 2021
This webinar looks at the legal principles and arguments that can be used to reduce claims for personal injury damages. It is being held on the 16th July 2021 (and available as an on-demand recording to the 16th January 2022). …
INTERIM PAYMENTS, ACCOMMODATION AND THE “EELES” CRITERIA: HIGH COURT ORDERS AND INTERIM PAYMENT OF £500,000
In AL v Collingwood Insurance & Ors [2021] EWHC 1761 (QB) Mr Justice Robin Knowles allowed a claimant’s application for a further interim payment of £500,000 to secure accommodation for a brain injured child. The case contains an important discussion…
WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: 8th JULY 2021
On the 8th July 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Periodical Payments and Provisional Damages. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at the law, practice and procedure relating to provisional damages and periodical payments…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES AND THE CHOUZA CASE (3): PAIN,SUFFERING AND SHOCK PRIOR TO DEATH
This is the third post in a detailed examination of the judgment in Chouza v Martins & Ors [2021] EWHC 1669 (QB). Here we look at the judgment in relation to the claim for pain and suffering prior to death. …
WEBINAR ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: 30th JUNE 2021
On the 30th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on accommodation and appliance claims. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR Claims for accommodation and appliances are a major part of many serious claims. Here we look at the…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES AND THE CHOUZA CASE (2): WHO IS A DEPENDANT?
This is the second post in a detailed examination of the judgment in Chouza v Martins & Ors [2021] EWHC 1669 (QB). Here the we look at the position as to whether adult children were in fact “dependants” entitled to…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES AND THE CHOUZA CASE (1): THE “PERCENTAGE” DEPENDENCY CLAIM
It is rare for fatal accident dependency cases to reach trial. A detailed examination of many aspects of fatal accident damages was carried by Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Chouza v Martins & Ors [2021] EWHC 1669 (QB). This is…
CARE CLAIMS IN PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 25th JUNE 2021
On the 25th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Care Claims in personal injury actions. Booking details are available here. This webinar looks at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical…
LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM: WEBINAR 18th JUNE 2021
On the 18th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on loss of earnings claims. The material includes a client questionnaire in relation to loss of earnings and income. Booking details are available here. TOPICS COVERED BY THE…
AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: NO GREATER AMOUNT IF YOU ARE RICH: A BLAST FROM THE PAST (64 YEARS TO BE PRECISE)
Often this blog covers judgments on the day they were made. Today, however, we are going back 64 years to 1957 looking at the case of Dunhill -v- Lumby reported on the 1st February 1957 in the Times. WHY THIS…
MORE ON MULTIPLE INJURIES, THE TARIFF AND TEST CASES
Official Injuries Claims have issued a release explaining the approach to test cases and multiple injuries. This explains the collaborative approach being adopted to find test cases in claims where the injuries fall inside and outside the tariff scheme. “neither…
MULTIPLE INJURIES AND THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018: CROSS-SECTOR WORKING GROUP WORKING ON IT
An earlier post dealt with the issues relating to multiple injuries in personal injury cases where a claimant suffered multiple injuries and some of those injuries are subject to the statutory tariff scheme whilst others are not. This is clearly…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2021
A post yesterday highlighted the uncertainties and complexities in relation to awards for pain and suffering where a claimant suffered multiple injuries some inside and some outside the statutory tariff scheme. This highlights the need for lawyers to understand precisely…
HOW MUCH IS AN ARM AND A NECK? THE ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN MULTIPLE INJURY CASES AFTER THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018
The “whiplash” element of Civil Liability Act 2018 comes into force on the 31st May 2021. This introduces fixed tariff sums for damages for pain and suffering in certain road traffic claims where there has been a “whiplash” injury. A…
CLAIMANT WAS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: TO WHAT EXTENT CAN A DEFENDANT EXPLORE “PERIPHERAL” MATTERS WHEN MAKING ASSERTIONS OF DISHONESTY?
In Long v Elegant Resorts Ltd [2021] EWHC 1330 (QB)HHJ Pearce (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered, and rejected, an argument that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. In fact the claimant beat his own Part 36…
You must be logged in to post a comment.