header-logo header-logo

20 July 2012 / Michael Brace
Issue: 7523 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

A shady business

Michael Brace analyses the power to strike out fraudulent claims at trial

In Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers [2012] UKSC 26, [2012] All ER (D) 179 (Jun), the respondent suffered serious hand and leg fractures in an accident at work in May 2003. In August 2007, the county court entered judgment for the respondent on liability with damages to be assessed. Undercover surveillance between October 2007 and September 2008 revealed him to have grossly exaggerated the effect of his injuries and his inability to work. The respondent’s initial schedule of loss claimed damages of £838,616.

Revised schedule of loss

After disclosure of the surveillance evidence, the schedule of loss was revised downwards to approximately £250,000. At the trial on damages the judge found there was no doubt that the respondent had suffered serious fractures requiring at least two operations. However, he also held that the respondent had deliberately lied about ongoing symptoms in and after March 2007. The judge restricted the loss of earnings claim to June 2007 and in addition made

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll