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’.