Pascale Hicks successfully represented the Defendant insured at a liability admitted claim following an accident at work.

View Pascale's Profile:- Here

Pascale successfully represented the Defendant insured at a liability admitted claim following an accident at work. The Claimant, an agency worker, pursued a claim pleaded in excess of £450,000 resulting in a multi-track trial, where Pascale secured a finding of fundamental dishonesty with dismissal of the claim pursuant to section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 and indemnity costs. 

In summary, the Claimant sustained a minor soft tissue injury to his left shoulder, where despite repeated complaints of pain and restriction the medical records failed to support his subjective complaints. The claim progressed with the Claimant maintaining severe limitation and restriction of movement to his left arm. He asserted that he had a flail arm. Pascale advised on strategy, prospects and tactics. The Defendant successfully opposed the introduction of disciplines of psychiatry and pain management by the Claimant.

The claim was listed for a multi-track trial before His Honour Judge Boora sitting at the county court in Walsall, who heard evidence from the Claimant and the Defendant’s orthopedic surgeon. The Claimant pursued past and future heads of loss for earnings, care and PSLA. HHJ Boora reminded himself that the burden of demonstrating fundamental dishonesty was on the Defendant and that this was a claim, where liability had been admitted. 

In his judgment, he held that the Claimant’s position was untenable. He found the Claimant’s testimony unreliable, noting his selective memory and evasive responses to Pascale’s challenging questions, whereas the Defendant’s expert appeared objective and credible, further undermining the Claimant’s position. 

The Judge ruled that the Claimant’s dishonesty was fundamental, as it went to the heart of his case. Given that no substantial injustice would result from dismissal, the entire claim was dismissed under Section 57 with the Claimant ordered to pay the Defendant’s costs on an indemnity basis.

Section 57 of the 2015 Act is an effective and powerful mechanism in fighting fraud. The outcome sends a clear message to Claimants who seek to dishonestly attribute and exaggerate injuries and losses following a minor genuine accident.

With thanks to Mandeep Chahal - Dhillon of Clyde & Co for their instruction.