30 October 2015
Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company PLC[ 2015] EWCA Civ 327. In our last update, we commented upon the case of Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company PLC. The case involved a claimant who raised an action for damages against his employers for a back injury sustained in the course of his employment.
Despite obtaining surveillance footage which showed that the claimant may have been exaggerating his injury, the claim was settled extra judicially with his employer’s insurer for £135,000. The insurers were tipped off some two years later by the claimant’s neighbours that the extent of the injuries had been exaggerated. The insurers therefore raised action against the claimant based on fraudulent misrepresentation, seeking damages or rescission of the settlement agreement.
At first instance, the Court agreed with the insurers and set aside the agreement. The Court of Appeal, however, disagreed and reinstated the original agreement. In the ruling, Lord Justice Underhill commented that Zurich had agreed the settlement with “eyes open” and as such, the award should stand because of the “wider principle” of finality of settlements. Lord Justice Underhill commented “that parties who settle claims with their eyes wide open should not be entitled to revive them only because better evidence comes along later."
We understand that the insurers have now lodged a further appeal with the Supreme Court, with the hearing likely to be later this year.
Jennifer Mackenzie, Associate jmk@bto.co.uk T. 0141 221 8012
Link to previous update: Eyes Wide Open - Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company [2015] EWCA Civ 237