Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Plc v Kosky [2013] EWHC 835 (QB) (07 March 2013)

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Plc v Kosky [2013] EWHC 835 (QB) (07 March 2013)

The insurers failed to establish a strong prima facie case that the defendant committed contempt of court, as the medical reports and records referenced in the particulars of claim did disclose her prior medical history, and the surveillance evidence did not clearly contradict her statements. Public interest did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 835
Parties
Claimant: Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance plc; Defendant: Shirley Kosky
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Commence Contempt Proceedings / Permission Application Under CPR 81.17
Outcome
Permission to bring contempt proceedings refused
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, False Statements, Personal Injury Claims, Statement of Truth
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Contempt of Court False Statements Personal Injury Claims Statement of Truth

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance plc

Claimant

Shirley Kosky

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Commence Contempt Proceedings / Permission Application Under CPR 81.17

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a strong prima facie case that the defendant committed contempt of court by causing a false statement of truth to be signed
  2. 2 Whether it is in the public interest for committal proceedings to be brought

Ratio Decidendi

The insurers failed to establish a strong prima facie case that the defendant committed contempt of court, as the medical reports and records referenced in the particulars of claim did disclose her prior medical history, and the surveillance evidence did not clearly contradict her statements. Public interest did not require detailed examination of the surveillance evidence at this stage.

Court Disposition

Permission to bring contempt proceedings refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to commence contempt proceedings is refused