This case sheds light on how courts are dealing with the application of new fundamental dishonesty rules in civil claims. Mrs Justice Cockerill indicated that the claimant had compromised his claim by lying about an important element of the case.

The 3 main points are:

  1. Fundamental dishonesty was made out. The admitted dishonesty was part of the potential success of the claim and the claimant had substantially affected the presentation of the case.

  2. The claimant could not find a ‘way out’ by arguing that he had suffered substantial injustice and that to allow this would be to ‘cut across what section 57 (Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015) is trying to achieve.’

  3. ‘Something more’ other than the mere loss of damages to which the Claimant was entitled was required to establish substantial injustice. If there was a claim it would fail at this stage.