Recent years have seen the Courts being better equipped to deal with the question of how to deal with claimants who falsify or exaggerate claims. As a body of case law begins to develop, this issue of the PI Briefing traces its development, considers how it might assist those advising litigants in such claims and raises questions about possible future developments.
In this issue: Susanna Bennett considers the Supreme Court’s decision in Ivey v Genting and reviews recent authorities in which questions of fundamental dishonesty have been considered. Dominique Smith discusses the appropriateness of contempt proceedings in the light of findings of fundamental dishonesty. Ben Hicks asks whether it can ever be appropriate for the Court to have regard to the motives behind the evidence given by less than truthful claimants.