The defendants sought to have the claimant committed for contempt, alleging that in exaggerating his symptoms, he had sought to inflate the amount of his damages claim.
Held: Contempt was found. Some of the allegations were found to have been proved. He had delliberately misled the doctors as to the extent of his medical condition: ‘there can be no doubt that it [his behaviour] was intended to persuade the court to find that he was seriously and permanently disabled and to award him damages to which he was not properly entitled. Had it not been for the surveillance evidence, it is very likely that that statement, supported by what he had told the doctors, would have led to his being awarded a substantial sum in damages to which he was not entitled. We therefore find that the defendant was in contempt of court in making a statement which he knew to be false with a view to influencing the outcome of the proceedings.’
Moore-Bick LJ, Cranston J
 EWHC 3631 (Admin)
Cited – In re Bramblevale Ltd 1970
For reasons of policy or pragmatism, the actual criminal standard of proof may be used in civil proceedings such as contempt of court. Contempt of court is a criminal offence. Accordingly, the burden of proving that the defendant is in contempt . .
Cited – Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers SC 27-Jun-2012
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury, Contempt of Court
Updated: 12 November 2021; Ref: scu.510727