In a recent landmark case, Senay & Anor v Mulsanne Insurance Company, the court clarified that dishonesty in a personal injury (PI) claim does not necessarily invalidate claims for other types of damages. This decision reinforces that, while the legal system has a firm stance against fraudulent personal injury claims, it also protects the claimant’s right to fair compensation for other legitimate losses.

His Honour Judge Charman ruled that the claimant’s dishonesty in his personal injury claim following a road traffic accident did not affect the validity of his claim for vehicle damage and loss of use. The ruling underscores that, under section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, fundamental dishonesty provisions apply specifically to personal injury aspects, not to other associated losses.

This judgement aligns with the earlier Reynolds v Chief Constable of Kent Police case, reaffirming that claims for losses distinct from the PI claim – such as vehicle repair or loss of use – can still proceed, even if dishonesty is proven in the personal injury aspect.

For those navigating the complexities of personal injury and associated claims, this case serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s nuanced approach, balancing the need to deter dishonesty with the protection of legitimate claims. To read more, see the Law Society Gazette article here.