Fundamental dishonesty meaning

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—7 March 2024 In this issue: Clinical negligence Fraud and fundamental dishonesty Damages Case management Costs Key PI & Clinical Negligence developments LexTalk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Clinical negligence Administrative Court dismisses appeal in clinical negligence claim The King’s Bench Division Administrative Court (Birmingham), in Chilton v Payne [2024] EWHC 451 (Admin), rejected the appellant’s appeal against an order dismissing her claim for damages against the respondent surgeon for negligence. The case concerned an alleged omission by the respondent to provide, or ensure, sufficient abdominoplasty follow-up and/or aftercare. She maintained, among other grounds, that the judge had erred in fact and in law: (i) in concluding there was no breach of the post-operative duty of care; and (ii) in his treatment of factual causation. On appeal, the court affirmed that the judge was right to find no duty on the respondent to...

Taiwo v Homelets of Bath Ltd [2025] EWHC 3173 (KB) What are the practical implications of this case? For the purposes of CJCA 2015, s 57, a claim seeking damages for anxiety stemming from harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 is to be treated as a personal injury claim. Consequently, where such a claim is held to be fundamentally dishonest, it must be dismissed unless the court is persuaded that dismissal would lead to substantial injustice. Where fundamental dishonesty is established, the court may: dismiss the whole claim, including components to which no dishonesty is attributed award indemnity costs disapply QOCS protection in respect of enforcement make adverse costs orders for hopeless or abusive appeal conduct The judgment also underlines that persisting with meritless grounds of appeal, particularly in an undisciplined fashion involving repeated applications and iterative documents, can warrant both adverse costs orders and the imposition of a civil restraint order. Finally, lawyers who provide...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—14 November 2024 In this issue: Clinical negligence Claims involving a mentally incapacitated claimant Accidents on the highway CPRC minutes Other PI and Clinical negligence news New Q&As Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community LexisNexis® Webinars Useful information Clinical negligence High Court rejects allegations of fundamental dishonesty in delayed diagnosis of laryngeal cancer case In Cullen v Henniker-Major, the claimant was accepted as a truthful witness and accusations of fundamental dishonesty failed. Following a laryngectomy, she needed continuous support for her stoma/airway and voice valve. The court favoured the claimant’s care expert, finding a live-in carer both suitable and workable, in preference to the defendant’s rehabilitation-focused proposal. Damages were granted for past gratuitous assistance, future care aligned with the live-in model, future psychological therapy, and future equipment. As the claimant remains entitled to NHS funding, the parties were asked to include...

PI & Clinical negligence horizon scanner—July 2025 [Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not maintained. It summarises the principal legal developments relevant to personal injury and clinical negligence practitioners as at July 2025. For developments predating this horizon scanner, see PI and Clinical Negligence horizon scanning and key cases—overview. Key PI and clinical negligence developments The personal injury discount rate—a review In late 2024, the Lord Chancellor, Shabana Mahmood MP, revealed the outcome of her five‑month review of the discount rate, initiated in July 2024. One month after the new +0.5% discount rate took effect, Thea Wilson (barrister at 12 King’s Bench Walk) assesses its impact on cases, the responses from claimant and defendant representatives, and the consequences of the change for legal practitioners. See News Analysis: The personal injury discount rate—a review. MoJ announces reduction in CFO’s interest rates The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced lower interest rates for the Courts Funds Office’s (CFO) special and basic accounts...

Fraud in personal injury claims can cover a spectrum of conduct, from overstating particular heads of damage to wholly inventing an accident and the ensuing injuries and losses. The available remedies where dishonesty is in play have been radically altered by section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (CJCA 2015). This provision can permit defendants to have otherwise meritorious claims struck out, to remove the shield of qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS), and to invalidate a claimant’s legal expenses cover. See Practice Notes: Personal injury claims and the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 and Qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS). Duties and responsibilities of parties and legal advisers Pleadings—CPR By virtue of CPR 16.5(2), if a defendant disputes an allegation in the particulars of claim, they must give their reasons; and where they propose a different account from the claimant’s, they must set out their own version of events. there is no strict obligation to plead fraud within the defence, but ...

This Practice Note summarises the principal legal updates relevant to personal injury and clinical negligence practitioners as at 2 March 2026, aimed at assisting current practice. For earlier developments, see PI and Clinical Negligence horizon scanning and key cases—overview. Key PI & clinical negligence developments Eighteenth edition of the Judicial College Guidelines due The 18th edition of the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG) will be released on 9 April 2026. The Lexis+® UK PI & Clinical Negligence team will refresh the JCG link within our Key Resources on the Lexis+® UK PI & Clinical Negligence homepage, together with all connected materials. Law Society publishes practice note on conduct of litigation following Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys Following the High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), the Law Society has issued guidance for solicitors, law firms and legal businesses to ensure that only individuals authorised under the Legal Services Act 2007 undertake the conduct of litigation...