When Is An Admission Not An Admission?

Case alert - Mr Thomas Church v WCF Limited & Mr Eric Marsh [2017] High Court (Manchester) 28/11/17

High Court finds that an admission is always an admission when it relates to the same accident

We have recently concluded the successful strike out of a high value personal injury claim advanced after a previous Portal admission by the Claimant's insurer. The public policy reasons for ensuring the integrity of the Portal system were paramount, irrespective of the severity of the proposed claim.

Background

The Claimant was involved in a serious road traffic accident in January 2013. After losing control of his vehicle, the Claimant was left lying in the carriageway. Mr Marsh, driving a HGV as part of his employment with WCF Limited, collided with the Claimant's vehicle and then the Claimant.

Mr Marsh was injured in the collision and pursued a claim against the Claimant via the MOJ Portal. Liability was admitted by the Claimant's insurers ("the admission"), and the claim was settled.

The Claimant subsequently pursued his own injury claim ("the claim") against Mr Marsh and WCF Limited as Defendants. Clyde and Co, acting for the Defendants, made an Application to strike out the Claim on the basis that it was an abuse of process.

The Claimant submitted that:

There was a distinction between a) the collision of the vehicles, and b) the collision of Mr Marsh's HGV with the Claimant's leg. Mr Marsh may not have been negligent in colliding with the Claimant's vehicle, but he was negligent in colliding with the Claimant. The admission was intended to relate to the collision between the vehicles only, as this was the mechanism by which Mr Marsh sustained his injury. The admission had been made by his insurers without actual or ostensible authority. The value of the claim, estimated at over £1 million, was considerably more than that of Mr Marsh and to dismiss the claim would be grossly unfair. We responded as follows:

The Claimant's Particulars of Claim clearly stated 'both' collisions were in fact one accident. The admission was clear and unequivocal. It related to the entirety of the accident, and therefore 'both' collisions. The Claimant did not disclose his motor insurance policy, but it likely contained a provision giving his insurer conduct of claims against him, including authority to make admissions of liability. The authority of Adriana Chimel v Chibwana and Williams (2016) stated that a liability admission...