Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd

Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd

The trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that the Claimant had not been fundamentally dishonest in relation to his care claim or the overall claim. The rejection of the care claim did not, in itself, require a finding of dishonesty. The judge's approach and analysis were appropriate and cannot be faulted.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Edward Wright; Defendant/appellant: Satellite Information Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Fundamental Dishonesty, Section 57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, Quantum of Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Wright

Claimant/respondent

Satellite Information Services Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in failing to find the Claimant fundamentally dishonest under section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
  2. 2 Whether the rejection of the care claim required a finding of dishonesty

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that the Claimant had not been fundamentally dishonest in relation to his care claim or the overall claim. The rejection of the care claim did not, in itself, require a finding of dishonesty. The judge's approach and analysis were appropriate and cannot be faulted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; judgment for the Claimant stands