Admissions – Risky Business?

The Claimant was paraplegic and relied on a motorised wheelchair. The Claimant asserted that in October 2009 her chair malfunctioned causing her to be propelled forward and suffer significant injury. The Claimant brought a Claim against a number of defendants, including D1, the chair manufacturers.

Prior to issue of proceedings, D1 admitted liability through its loss adjustors. However, D1 subsequently realised that another Defendant had fitted new components on the chair. D1 therefore sought to withdraw its admission claiming that the chair was no longer the same chair that it had supplied.

The Court refused to allow D1 permission to withdraw its admission. The Court considered the following in reaching its decision:

it appeared that the real ground for D1's application to withdraw its admission was that the Claim had increased in value since D1 had admitted liability. However, the Court considered that this was a risk inherent in any personal injury claim, which did not justify D1 withdrawing its admission. D1 had made the admission after having inspected the chair. If D1 had taken reasonable steps to investigate, it would have discovered that modifications had been made after the chair had been supplied to the Claimant. D1 had delayed considerably before indicating its intention to withdraw from its admission and both the Claimant and D2 would be prejudiced by its...