0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Molloy v Shell UK Limited, Court of Appeal

16 July 2001
The issues

Costs- Deliberate Exaggeration Of Injuries By The Claimant – Abuse of Civil Proceedings – Costs Consequences

The facts

The Claimant sued the Defendant for personal injuries. He worked as a scaffolder on an oil platform in the North Sea and fell on a ramp injuring his back. He claimed loss of earnings. He had attempted to mitigate by unsuccessfully re-training as a bus driver and a forklift truck driver.

Liability was admitted. A Payment Into Court of £20,000.00 was made. A schedule of loss claiming over £300,000.00 was served. Days before Trial Defendant discovered that Claimant had returned to the oil platform as a scaffolder and had worked there on a fairly regular basis for three years. The claim had been grossly and deliberately exaggerated. The award was less than the amount paid into Court
by the Defendant. The Judge ordered the Claimant to pay 75% of the Defendant’s costs.

The Defendant appealed.

The decision

The Judge was obliged under Civil Procedure Rules Part 44.35 to consider the Claimant’s conduct. The Court process had been abused. The Claimant had been grossly dishonest and given that the Payment Into Court had not been beaten the only way in which the Judge’s discretion should have been exercised was to award the Defendant all of its costs.

NB The Claimant was not represented and did not appear.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up