Judge: Yip J
Citation:  EWHC 1342 (QB)
When determining whether a trial on the issue of fundamental dishonesty should proceed after a claim has been discontinued, the Court has a broad discretion, having regard to all the circumstances and the overriding objective.
In a road traffic accident, both the driver and the passenger claimed damages. The Defendant alleged that the Second Claimant was not in the First Claimant’s car at the time of the accident. The claim was accordingly fraudulent and consequently the First Claimant’s claim was tainted by that dishonesty. The claims were subsequently discontinued. The Defendant applied to the Court to disapply the effect of QOCS on the basis of fundamental dishonesty. The Judge at first instance refused to exercise the discretion on the ground that there was no particular exceptional quality about the case. On appeal, the Judge was found to have applied the wrong test. Having regard to all the circumstances, it was reasonable for the Defendant to be given the opportunity to put forward its evidence and to test the Claimant’s evidence on the issue of fundamental dishonesty.