Content by Philip Davy

Prior to the introduction of s. 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (CJCA 2015), the court would disallow the dishonest elements but allow the honest elements of the claim. However, in the course of three short years (during which the decision in Summers v Fairclough Homes [2012] 1 WLR 2004 was handed down,…

For several years in the 2000s and 2010s, the law relating to vicarious liability and non-fault liability more generally was ‘on the move’. However, in the last couple of years, the case law dealing with non-fault liability has been far less fruitful for claimants (e.g. Barclays Bank Plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13; SKX…

The single joint expert’s decision can often have a decisive effect upon the viability and outcome of a given claim, particularly a disease claim. If the expert’s opinion is unfavourable, the aggrieved party will want to try and salvage the position. Unfortunately, given how busy single joint experts often are, by the time the report…

The mustard flower is simple and delicate. The mustard seed, on the other hand, packs more of a punch. Pleadings of fundamental dishonesty in cases where there is no strong evidence (such as damaging surveillance) of a claimant’s fraud should, it seems, be more like the former than the latter. Background In 2017, the Court…

Click here to view the Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council – Commentary.