Mon12112017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

CONDUCT: Hoisted by their own petard?

28 November 2017  

In the first of two articles, Suzanne Chalmers and Jack Macaulay explore the current law relating to claimants’ illegality and dishonesty

A ‘petard’ was a small bomb, used in the 16th century to blow up gates and walls. ‘Hoisted’ also bears a historical meaning – to be blown up. So, if you are hoisted by your own petard you are blown up by your own bomb; injured by the device that you sought to use to injure others. This expression is thus apposite to describe the consequences which may follow from a claimant’s illegal or dishonest conduct. There are two related issues to consider: what happens where the claimant’s illegal or criminal conduct forms part of the underlying facts which give rise to the claim, and the effect of the claimant’s criminal conduct or dishonesty when advancing claims.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Beaumont & anor v Ferrer [2016] EWCA Civ 768

    Gray v Thames Trains & ors [2009] UKHL 33

    Hounga v Allen & anor [2014] UKSC 47

    Jetvia SA & anor v Bilta (UK) Ltd & ors [2015] UKSC 23

    Joyce v O’Brien & anor [2013] EWCA Civ 546

    Les Laboratoires Serviers v Apotex [2014] UKSC 55

    McCracken v Smith & ors [2015] EWCA Civ 380

    McHugh v Okai-Koi [2017] EWHC 1346 (QBD)

    Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42

    Spencer v Wincanton Holdings Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1404

Last modified on 28 November 2017