Dominic Regan tackles misrepresentation, fraud & injustice
With commendable alacrity the Supreme Court has delivered a unanimous judgment that has immense ramifications for civil litigators among others. Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company plc [2016] UKSC 48, [2016] All ER (D) 138 (Jul) is a decision about misrepresentation and fraud in a personal injury claim. The guidance is not confined to that arena.
Case history
Mr Hayward was indeed injured and long ago. Zurich, as liability insurer for his employer, was obliged to deal with his claim. It paid out £134, 973.11 despite having reservations about his credibility in general and the seriousness of his condition in particular. The settlement was embodied in a consent order.
Two years later his neighbours volunteered evidence to the effect that Hayward had wilfully exaggerated his symptoms on a massive scale. Armed with this material the insurer now sued to recover the difference between what it had paid out and what it ought to have settled for.
An attempt to have the insurer’s claim struck out was
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=7bf1005b_1)
