In its written evidence to the House of Commons Justice Committee’s access to justice inquiry, published this week, APIL cites increasing use of this strategy as one of a series of factors, including LASPO (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012), that have ‘profoundly undermined’ justice for injured victims of negligence in the past 15 years.
Only claimants can be accused of fundamental dishonesty. If proven, the claim is thrown out and the claimant may have to pay costs penalties.
APIL says its members have ‘reported a dramatic increase’ in the tactic, noting that ‘most of the time [the defendants] have no intention of making the accusation formal but the claimant will not know that until later in the case, when the damage may have been done’. They cite the case of Cullen v Henniker-Major [2024] EWHC 2809 (KB) where the defendant made six allegations of fundamental dishonesty, all dismissed by the judge.
In its evidence, APIL points out that fixed recoverable costs, introduced in 2010, have not kept pace with inflation. For example, the costs recoverable for employers’ liability claims over £10,000 are fixed at £1,600 but would have risen to £2,205 if increased in line with inflation. APIL says its members are taking on fewer potential employers’ liability cases, since lawyers now need to tell clients that if they win, a ‘very significant slice’ of their compensation will be lost to legal fees and insurance.
Matthew Tuff, APIL president, urged the government to ‘put people before profits’, and described LASPO as ‘particularly damaging as it introduced unfair costs risks for injured people who make claims for redress’.
