header-logo header-logo

Fundamental dishonesty: a double-edged sword?

14 April 2021 / HHJ Karen Walden-Smith
Issue: 7928 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
45619
HHJ Karen Walden-Smith examines the importance of restraint when raising allegations of fundamental dishonesty
  • Qualified one-way costs shifting and s 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 mean that defendants in personal injury claims will often allege that the claim is fundamentally dishonest.
  • While this allegation is crucial for the deterrence of dishonest claimants, there is a danger that it is being used by some defendants to dissuade the bringing of personal injury claims, thereby discouraging the genuine claimant.

The large number of smaller personal injury claims that are met with allegations that the claim is fundamentally dishonest is a consequence of qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) and the provisions of section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (CJCA 2015). Such allegations should not be raised to deter the bringing of genuine claims.

QOCS & section 57

The origins of the QOCS regime lie in Sir Rupert Jackson’s Review of Civil Litigation Costs, and the observation that ‘in personal injuries litigation

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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll