Description
The applicant applied for the committal of the respondent for contempt of court on the basis that he had advanced a dishonest claim for which he had been awarded damages for personal injury following an RTA. After the claim was settled documents were discovered which suggested that the Claimant had deliberately and dishonestly presented an inflated claim. The court had to be satisfied that the statements which the Claimant had made were false, he knew them to be false when he made them, and that at the time they were made they would have, if persisted in, been likely interfere with the course of justice, and he knew they would be so likely to interfere. The Claimant accepted that some of the statements that he had relied upon were misleading, however he averred this was due to his carelessness and irresponsibility rather than evidence of a deliberate attempt to mislead the court. Considered as a whole, the evidence did not prove to the required criminal standard that the Claimant had acte d dishonestly with intent to pursue a false claim or had appreciated he was advancing a false claim.
