Yaman v Parmar & Ors [2023] EW Misc 15 (CC) (17 November 2023)

Yaman v Parmar & Ors [2023] EW Misc 15 (CC) (17 November 2023)

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that Ms Yaman and Mr Zada knowingly participated in a staged accident and made fraudulent representations to Tesco to obtain compensation. The objective evidence, including the bump card, photographs, and expert forensic engineering analysis, demonstrated the accident was not genuine and the damage was deliberately inflicted. The claimants' evidence was found to be untruthful and unreliable. Accordingly, Tesco succeeded in its counterclaim for deceit and conspiracy.

Citation
[2023] EW Misc 15 (CC)
Parties
Claimant: Eda Yaman; First Defendant: Manish Parmar; Second Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Tesco Stores Limited; First Part 20 Defendant: Mustafa Zada
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort (personal Injury, Fraud, Conspiracy) / Judgment After Trial of Counterclaim and Part 20 Proceedings
Outcome
Judgment for Tesco Stores Limited on the counterclaim and Part 20 claim; claim by Ms Yaman dismissed.
Legal Topics
Deceit, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Personal Injury, Fraudulent Claims, Vicarious Liability
Tort Law Civil Procedure Insurance Law Deceit Unlawful Means Conspiracy Personal Injury Fraudulent Claims Vicarious Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eda Yaman

Claimant

Manish Parmar

First Defendant

Tesco Stores Limited

Second Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Mustafa Zada

First Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Tort (personal Injury, Fraud, Conspiracy) / Judgment After Trial of Counterclaim and Part 20 Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accident on 3 August 2019 was a genuine road traffic accident or a staged/fraudulent event
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant and First Part 20 Defendant made fraudulent misrepresentations to Tesco
  3. 3 Whether there was a conspiracy to defraud Tesco by staging accidents and submitting false claims

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that Ms Yaman and Mr Zada knowingly participated in a staged accident and made fraudulent representations to Tesco to obtain compensation. The objective evidence, including the bump card, photographs, and expert forensic engineering analysis, demonstrated the accident was not genuine and the damage was deliberately inflicted. The claimants' evidence was found to be untruthful and unreliable. Accordingly, Tesco succeeded in its counterclaim for deceit and conspiracy.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Tesco Stores Limited on the counterclaim and Part 20 claim; claim by Ms Yaman dismissed.

Orders

  • Claim by Ms Yaman dismissed as fraudulent.
  • Judgment for Tesco on the counterclaim for deceit and conspiracy.