A defendant’s surveillance evidence of the claimant on a personal injury claim may be allowed where it would substantially reduce the award of damages—so long as the claimant has not been ambushed, the High Court held in Hayden v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1121 (QB). District Judge Stephen Gold, writing in NLJ this week, surveys the case and how the judge reached the decision.
03 June 2016
Surveillance evidence
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Katten Muchin Rosenman—Charlotte Hill
Katten strengthens financial markets and funds group in London
Hugh James—Keith Cundall & Lee Hart
Hugh James expands national Serious Injury team with two new Partners
HFW—Rémi Ducloyer
HFW continues Paris office growth with public law Partner hire
NEWS
The Court of Appeal's decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP has lifted months of uncertainty for Chartered Legal Executives while prompting a rethink of regulation and supervision
The assisted dying debate returns to Westminster as Lauren Edwards MP reintroduces legislation that stalled in the House of Lords last session despite clearing the Commons
A little-noticed provision of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 has fundamentally expanded corporate criminal liability
Artificial intelligence is transforming legal practice, but careless reliance on it is creating growing professional risks
The law offers cohabiting couples surprisingly greater protection after one partner dies than when they separate during life
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
