header-logo header-logo

03 May 2024 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 8069 / Categories: Features , Personal injury , Damages , In Court
printer mail-detail

Personal injury: trying it on

169535
Personal injury claimants are well warned about dishonesty. Sadly, some don’t listen. Dominic Regan examines a wise judgment from a recent case
  • An examination of Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024], in which Mr Justice Ritchie found ‘breathtaking’ dishonesty.

Very nearly £600,000. That is the amount of damages a claimant would have received had she not been fundamentally dishonest. In the event, she lost every penny. The magisterial judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Williams-Henry (by her mother and litigation friend Christel Williams) v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB), [2024] All ER (D) 44 (Apr) is required reading for anyone involved in personal injury claims. Lawyers, doctors and others such as care experts will learn so much.

The claimant was genuine insofar as she was the victim of an accident, having suffered a moderately severe brain injury from a nasty fall off Aberavon Pier. Liability was settled at two-thirds in her favour. Sadly, she was ‘breathtakingly dishonest’, a description of part of her evidence found at para [106] of the judgment. That robust assessment

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll