The second defendant insurers appealed against a refusal by the court to allow it to withdraw an admission of liability in respect of a road traffic accident. The insurer said that the fact that it now saw the accident as fraudulent was an exceptional circumstance such as to allow the change.
Held: The appeal failed. The CPR required: ‘(a) the grounds upon which the applicant seeks to withdraw the admission including whether or not new evidence has come to light which was not available at the time the admission was made;
(b) the conduct of the parties, including any conduct which led the party making the admission to do so;
(c) the prejudice that may be caused to any person if the admission is withdrawn;
(d) the prejudice that may be caused to any person if the application is refused;
(e) the stage in the proceedings at which the application to withdraw is made, in particular in relation to the date or period fixed for trial;
(f) the prospects of success (if the admission is withdrawn) of the claim or part of the claim in relation to which the offer was made; and
(g) the interests of the administration of justice.
The judge had correctly followed these guidelines and had accepted the difficulties inherent in the evidence.
The experts agreed that the best source of information would be the cars involved. The car at issue had been destroyed, removing a major element in the driver being able to dispute the serious allegation of fraud. The Judge did not arrive at a perverse conclusion. It was one that was entirely reasonable in the circumstances confronting her.
Judges:
Eady J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 3632 (QB)
Links:
Statutes:
Civil Procedure Rules 14 PD 7.2
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd Gleeds Management Services Ltd QBD 25-Jan-2006
It is not necessary for a party to seek permission to rely upon an expert’s report, when disclosed by another party, even though the court has not given anyone specific permission to do so. . .
Cited – Woodland v Stopford and Others CA 16-Mar-2011
The claimant appealed against a decision allowing a defendant to withdraw an admission of liability. As a child she had got into difficulties during a class swimming lesson, and had ceased to breathe leaving her with catastrophic hypoxic brain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insurance, Litigation Practice
Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.467145