Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd [2019] EWHC 2712 (QB) (16 October 2019)

Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd [2019] EWHC 2712 (QB) (16 October 2019)

The trial judge's reasons, though brief, were sufficient to explain the finding that the defendant was not negligent at the point of collision, and this finding was supported by the evidence. However, the claimant's deliberate failure to disclose credit cards and a bank account was fundamentally dishonest and went to the root of a substantial part of the claim, justifying disapplication of QOCS and enforcement of the costs order against him.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2712
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mansur Haider; Respondent/defendant: DSM Demolition Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Claimant's appeal dismissed; Defendant's cross-appeal on fundamental dishonesty allowed
Legal Topics
Road Traffic Accident, Negligence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (qocs), Relief From Sanctions, Disclosure Obligations
Tort Civil Procedure Road Traffic Accident Negligence Fundamental Dishonesty Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (qocs) Relief From Sanctions Disclosure Obligations

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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mansur Haider

Appellant/claimant

DSM Demolition Ltd

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge gave adequate reasons for finding no negligence by the defendant driver
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's finding on negligence was supported by the evidence
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was fundamentally dishonest such that QOCS protection should be disapplied

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's reasons, though brief, were sufficient to explain the finding that the defendant was not negligent at the point of collision, and this finding was supported by the evidence. However, the claimant's deliberate failure to disclose credit cards and a bank account was fundamentally dishonest and went to the root of a substantial part of the claim, justifying disapplication of QOCS and enforcement of the costs order against him.

Court Disposition

Claimant's appeal dismissed; Defendant's cross-appeal on fundamental dishonesty allowed

Orders

  • Claimant's appeal dismissed
  • Defendant granted relief from sanctions for late filing of cross-appeal