Surveillance evidence in personal injury claims
Produced in partnership with David Willink of Lamb Chambers
Surveillance evidence in personal injury claims

The following PI & Clinical Negligence guidance note Produced in partnership with David Willink of Lamb Chambers provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Surveillance evidence in personal injury claims
  • Overview
  • The nature of surveillance evidence
  • Avoiding prior notice of surveillance
  • Secrecy and the rights of the claimant
  • When to disclose surveillance evidence
  • Issues for the claimant
  • Issues for the defendant
  • After disclosure of surveillance evidence
  • Surveillance after judgment

STOP PRESS: Note that amendments to CPR PD 22 regarding statements of truth will come into force on 6 April 2020. The changes address the issue of cases where a witness statement is presented in English but where, notwithstanding signature of the statement, the witness cannot speak English and the statement is not necessarily ‘in their own words’. CPR PD 22 will also require a statement of truth to be dated with the date that it is signed and the required wording of the statement of truth will be amended to include a warning that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against those who give a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. For more information, see News Analysis: 113th practice direction update—31 March and 6 April 2020—Changes in force 6 April 2020. This content will be updated in light of these changes in time for the 6 April 2020 in force date.

Overview

In civil proceedings, surveillance evidence is most commonly used by defendants in personal injury claims. Its aim is to show any difference between the claimant’s allegations of impairments consequent on the index accident, and the truth.

The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) makes no separate provision for surveillance evidence; a recording is considered a document, and CPR 31 applies.

There are three particular