Ronald acted for a claimant who was injured in a car accident. The defendant denied liability on the basis that the claimant was making a fraudulent claim having conspired with others to cause the accident deliberately. The defendant had commissioned a report from an accident expert who concluded that the accident could not have happened in the way the claimant had described.
This case involved Ronald in:
* effective cross examination of expert
* drawing the court’s attention to the requisite standard of evidence that has to be met when fraud is being alleged.
In closing submissions he effectively drew out all the relevant points, especially the fact that the expert report was based on photographs of the vehicles in question taken shortly after
the accident, and not at the accident site, and that the allegation of fraud was not established.