PI Brief Update

Omanovic v Shamaazi Ltd & Ismael Abdela Mohammed [2025] EWHC 110 (KB) - Andrew Ratomski, Temple Garden Chambers

24/02/25. Date of judgment: 21 January 2025

Introduction

An important point of civil procedure recently arose in this claim for breach of contract and tortious conspiracy which can often arise in multi-party personal injury litigation, especially where allegations of fraud or unlawful means conspiracy are made against several parties, namely the admissibility of settlement terms when comprising a claim against some but not all claimants or defendants. The decision is also useful when assessing the merits of making or accepting settlement offers that cut-off parties and how that might impact the evidential matrix for the remaining disputed issues. This case highlights that previous settlements are risky ground for making allegations of dishonesty and may limit the scope for cross-examination on those issues at trial.

Issue

The Defendants sought an order that evidence of the terms by which a second and third claimant’s claims were comprised be declared as inadmissible evidence at the trial of the (remaining) claimant’s claim for want of relevance or to be excluded under Part 32. The claimant sought evidence of the fact of settlement and its quantum because he alleged the second defendant was not only in breach of contract but dishonest and had made assertions in his witness evidence said to be inconsistent with the compromise reached. It was said these topics and his honesty would be explored in cross-examination.

The proceedings had originally been issued by three claimants on 12 June 2023. The claims for breach of contract and conspiracy related to a charitable giving venture focused on donations that are made during the last ten days of Ramadan that often overwhelm donors and charitable organisations due to the volume of gifts at the time.

Each claimant had been promised...

Image ©iStockphoto.com/BernardaSv

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...