James Paterson secures finding of fundamental dishonesty for the Defendant insurer in a claim in which the Court determined the Claimant was not exaggerating about injury, he was ‘simply dishonest’ as he wasn’t injured.
James Paterson represented the Defendant in a claim involving a minor road traffic accident in which breach of duty and causation were in dispute. The Court found in favour of the Defendant on breach of duty and also made a finding that the claim was fundamentally dishonest on the grounds that not only was the accident not capable of causing injury but the Claimant was not, in fact, injured at all. In making the finding, DDJ Mahmood, sitting at the County Court in Bradford, commented that is was not a case in which the Claimant was exaggerating but a case in which he was ‘simply dishonest’.
Also Recently
-
Iain Simkin KC prosecutes a Husband and son jailed for 'shocking' neglect death.
Iain Simkin KC recently prosecuted a Husband and son jailed for 'shocking' neglect death.The husband and son of a severely…
Mar 26
-
Deans Court Chambers Mourns the Loss of Jonathan Grace
It is with great shock and sadness that Deans Court Chambers announces the death of our dear friend and colleague,…
Mar 25