- Rear-end shunt road traffic collisions and fundamental dishonesty in credit hire claims (Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd)
- What are the practical implications of the case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- The trial
- The appeal
- The cross appeal
- Case details
Personal Injury analysis: The claimant’s personal injury claim arising from a rear-end shunt road traffic accident was dismissed. The High Court dismissed the claimant’s appeal, paying particular regard to the low speed and the standard of driving required in relation to braking and stopping distances. The High Court allowed the defendant’s cross-appeal on the question of fundamental dishonesty. The claimant was fundamentally dishonest by deliberately failing to disclose their financial circumstances and preventing the defendant from investigating their claimed impecuniosity in respect of their credit hire claim. William Poole, barrister at St John’s Buildings, considers the case.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial