4th July, 2019

Ben Morris secures findings of fundamental dishonesty and an enforceable costs order pursuant to CPR 44.16

In A & R v Aviva Insurance two Claimants advanced claims for personal injury and loss following a road traffic accident in 2017. 

The First Claimant claimed that the vehicle that she had been driving, and in which the other Claimant was a passenger, was turning into a side road when the Defendant’s insured emerged from that side road and into the Claimants' correctly proceeding vehicle.  Breach of duty was admitted.  The Claimants contended that as a consequence they suffered multiple soft tissue injuries lasting many months. 

The Court found that the accident was capable of causing injury and that indeed the Claimants may well have been injured.  However, following cross examination, the Court was unable to determine what those injuries were and moreover found that the Claimants had dishonestly exaggerated the nature and extent of any injury suffered.  The Claimants were found to be fundamentally dishonest and the Defendant was awarded enforceable costs on the indemnity basis.

Ben's profile, including further details of his insurance fraud practice, can be viewed here.



Latest News...

9SJS welcomes three new pupils!

22nd September, 2023

9SJS warmly welcomes Emily Bonass[our-people/barristers/emily-bonass/], Jolene Charalambous[our-people/barristers/jolene-charalambous/] and Natasha Otero[our-people/barristers/natasha-otero/] to Chambers. All three have just started their...

Elizabeth Murray and Leanne Jones secured success for their respective clients in this 2 day Employers Liability/Occupiers Liability trial in which the Second Defendant was ordered to pay out almost £50,000.

22nd September, 2023
Elizabeth represented the Claimant who had been injured during the course of her employment with the Second Defendant as a "bus shunter". The Claimant originally pursued a claim against the First Defendant, as owner/occupier of the premises, and the Second Defendant, as her employer. The Second Defendant in turn brought a CPR 20.6 claim for contribution/indemnity against the First Defendant on the basis that, as the employer, it had no control over the workplace, premises, equipment, devices and systems.

Free Zoom Webinar. Thursday 28th September 2023 Time 4.30pm – 1 hour estimated length

21st September, 2023

Coercive and Controlling Behaviour in Private Law Children Act Cases Speakers: Sarah Kilvington and Emily Landale This...