Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

LITIGATION: Playing with fire – meeting suspicious claims head-on

29 July 2011  

David Sawtell looks at recent case law on exaggerated claims

Recent cases in the High Court and the Court of Appeal indicate that defendant insurance companies are turning to a range of procedural mechanisms to defeat, re-open and punish fraudulent or exaggerated claims. When presented with clear and plausible evidence of possible fraud, the courts are now accepting that it is in the public interest to look into this carefully. This can mean that surveillance evidence can be disclosed close to trial, where the delay has been caused by the claimant. There are now a number of cases where the courts have held that the public interest in tackling fraud outweighs the need for the finality of litigation. Finally, more cases have been brought for contempt of court, but with varying results.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Douglas v O’Neill [2011] EWHC 601 (QB)

    Kirk v Walton [2008] EWHC 1780, [2009] EWHC 703

    MIB v Shikell & ors [2011] EWHC 527 (QB)

    Montgomery v Brown [2011] EWHC 875 (QB)

    Singh & ors v Habib & anor [2011] EWCA Civ 599

    Zurich Insurance v Hayward [2011] EWCA Civ 641