Matthew Hooper defeats pleaded allegation of fundamental dishonesty on behalf of Claimant in employers’ liability claim.

The Claimant, a cleaner, suffered chemical burns and soft tissue injuries as a result of slipping on a caustic cleaning product at his place of work in 2021. The Defendant, for whom the Claimant continued to work at the date of trial, denied liability and alleged that the Claimant’s injury claim was dishonestly exaggerated.

The trial was heard by HHJ Coe K.C. in the County Court at Nottingham. The Judge found that the Defendant had breached its duty of care to the Claimant in two material ways: firstly, by pouring cleaning product onto the floor without informing the Claimant, the Claimant’s colleague had set a trap and exposed the Claimant to a foreseeable risk of injury, and secondly, by failing to provide the Claimant with overalls in breach of its own risk assessment, the Defendant had exposed the Claimant to a foreseeable risk of suffering chemical burns to his exposed skin.

The Defendant’s allegation of dishonesty was based principally on the fact the Claimant’s orthopaedic expert considered there to be a significant disparity between the Claimant’s description of symptoms and the physical findings noted on examination, such that the ongoing symptoms complained of could not be explained from an orthopaedic perspective.

HHJ Coe K.C. determined that the Claimant’s presentation on examination, while inexplicable by reference to the examination findings, was entirely honest, and the Defendant had “fallen a very long way short of establishing fundamental dishonesty”.

Judgment was entered in the Claimant’s favour and the award of damages exceeded a Part 36 offer made by the Claimant, thus engaging the provisions of CPR 36.17.

Many thanks to Jade Doran at True Solicitors for the instructions.

View Matthew's profile here:- https://lnkd.in/gipvfQSx