PI Practitioner – each issue a particular topic is highlighted, citing some of the useful cases and other materials in that area


Singh v Habib [2011] EWCA] Civ 599

In an allegedly fraudulent road traffic accident, the Second Defendant insurer (the First Defendant not cooperating) sought to introduce new evidence of fraud at the appeal before the Circuit Judge (the District Judge having found for the Claimant).

The Court of Appeal allowed the Second Defendant’s appeal against the Circuit Judge’s refusal to grant permission to rely on such additional evidence. In particular the Court of Appeal highlighted that the pre-CPR authorities on the admission of additional evidence are not to be taken as a strait jacket. It would be a counsel of perfection to consider that defence solicitors engaged in modest RTA litigation, mindful of the need to conduct matters proportionately, would have come across the evidence in question. The Court should be particularly aware of the public interesting preventing fraudulent RTA claims when considering this type of question.

October 4, 2011 В· Editorial Team В· Comments Closed
Posted in: Cases