Jonathan Lally defends in road traffic case before HHJ Rawlings
Khan & Khan v Bi
Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Fraud, Phantom Occupants.
The Claimants claimed to be occupants of a stationary motor vehicle parked outside their home address when the Defendant's vehicle collided at low speed with the rear corner the stationary vehicle. They both claimed damages for personal injury. The Defendant disputed that there were any occupants of the vehicle at the time of the collision. The Defendant’s case was that the First Claimant (Mr Khan) was stood on the pavement next to the vehicle and that the Second Claimant (Mrs Khan) was not in the vehicle. Following a trial before HHJ Rawlings at Stoke on Trent County Court, the claims were both dismissed and findings of fundamental dishonesty were made in respect of both Claimants. The Judge found that neither were in the vehicle and there were consequently no injuries sustained as a result of the collision. Having found both claims to be fundamentally dishonest, he ordered both Claimants to pay the Defendant’s costs assessed in the sum of £14,500 and granted the Defendant permission to enforce the costs under CPR 44.16.
Also Recently
-
James Paterson secures a finding of fundamental dishonesty (‘FD’) in a claim in which the Claimant was found to have deliberately misled his medical experts
James Paterson secures a finding of fundamental dishonesty (‘FD’) in a claim in which the Claimant was found to have…
Sept 03
-
James Paterson secures a finding of fundamental dishonesty in a claim in which the Claimant was found to have deliberately misled his medical expert
James Paterson secures a finding of fundamental dishonesty (‘FD’) in a claim in which the Claimant was found to have…
Aug 20










