header-logo header-logo

27 May 2010 / Brent Mcdonald
Issue: 7419 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Caught in the act

Brent McDonald considers the high cost of exaggeration & fraud

Mark Noble was seriously injured when his motorcycle collided with a car driven by the defendant. Liability was admitted. At an assessment hearing in 2008 the claimant gave evidence that he remained dependent on crutches and a wheelchair, would never work again, and needed daily care and assistance. Damages were assessed by the judge in the sum of just under £3.4m.

By autumn 2008 the defendant’s insurers received confidential information that the claimant had exaggerated his claim and as a result undertook covert surveillance on seven occasions, each time filming for several hours. The insurers alleged that the films showed the claimant walking without the aid of crutches or a stick, stretching and bending without difficulty, driving a dumper truck and carrying out activities such as sawing wood.

The defendant’s insurers applied for and obtained an injunction restraining Mr Noble from spending the rest of his damages and gave an undertaking to bring an appeal out of time. The allegations of exaggeration

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll