Mann v Armac

Mann v Armac, 15 February 2019, HHJ Gargan, Middlesbrough County Court. Geoffrey Brown was instructed by Charles Martin, Partner, of Kennedys Law and acted for the Defendant in a 5 day trial, at which findings of fundamental dishonesty were made against the Claimant in regard to both the nature/circumstances of the accident and his alleged post-accident disability.

The case involved an accident at work (a demolition project, involving removal of asbestos). The Claimant had given a signed statement on the day of the accident, describing it having occurred in an innocuous way. He made out that this was a false account of his accident, which his supervisor and manager had put him up to giving, in order to avoid adverse health and safety interest. But that was rejected by the Court as fundamentally dishonest. The Claimant also maintained to his neurosurgical expert he had had to give up his sporting hobby of Thai boxing and was unable to any kind of household task.

There were, however, references in medical and physiotherapy records to ongoing participation in his sport.  The Claimant's explanations, that these were based on misunderstandings by medical staff or were a product of him bigging himself up to his physiotherapist were also rejected as fundamentally dishonest.  In regard to the status of such records, the Judge followed Calderdale v Atwal and Rowan v Charnock.