How to respond to the growing use of surveillance evidence in PI and Clinical Negligence cases
In recent years surveillance evidence has become an increasingly valuable weapon for insurance companies representing defendants; covert surveillance can negatively impact a claimant’s credibility, undermine their claim or even result in the claim being dismissed entirely.
Therefore, it is essential that all practitioners are up to speed with this aspect of personal injury practice.
This session, delivered by PI solicitor and lecturer Nicky Carter, will examine the latest arguments and issues raised by surveillance evidence. Consideration will be given to the implications of surveillance evidence for the claimant, how the impact of such evidence can be reduced and how in certain circumstances the evidence can be excluded altogether.
Nicky will also discuss why defendants may not be able to introduce surveillance evidence and the preparations that claimants can make to reduce the risk of late and damaging applications to allow surveillance evidence.
The impact of the case of Hayden v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust Queen's Bench Division 12 May 2016  EWHC 1121 (QB) will be examined and the following topics discussed:
• When and how applications are made
• Court discretion
• Fundamental Dishonesty-Implications
The cases of Douglas v O'Neill  EWHC 601 (QB) and O'Leary v Tunnelcraft Ltd  EWHC 3438 (QB) will also be considered.
Do you want to continue your session?