Dominic Regan on Fairclough Homes, dishonest claims & the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has at last adjudicated upon an issue that has troubled lawyers for at least a decade. Does a court, either pursuant to an inherent jurisdiction to deal with abuse of its processes, or under the Civil Procedure Rules, have the power to strike out an entire claim for damages because the claim, or the manner of its presentation, is substantially fraudulent? If so, how should that power be exercised? The decision or denouement in Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers, published on 27 June 2012, is dealt with below.
Dubious claims
No doubt there have been some dubious claims for as long as claims have been entertained by the courts. The current uncertainty, now resolved, can be traced back to an obiter grenade lobbed by Laws LJ in Molloy v Shell [2001] EWCA Civ 1272, [2001] All ER (D) 79 (Jul). The claimant had been injured in an accident for which the defendant was liable. He grossly inflated his claim
