Hull College Instructing Hospitals NHS Belief -v- Natasha Colley: Contempt of Courtroom | Medical Negligence and Private Harm Weblog | Kingsley Napley

My weblog on the choice of Ritchie J within the case of Cojanu thought-about the method taken by the Courtroom when a Defendant advances a defence of basic dishonesty. This weblog summarises the place when a Defendant submits an software to commit a Claimant’s Litigation Pal for contempt of Courtroom for false statements made in a doc verified by a press release of reality.

Megan Colley (the Claimant in a scientific negligence declare assisted by her Mom and Litigation Pal, Natasha Colley) was born with extreme acetabular dysplasia, a dysfunction of the hip joints. She alleged that with acceptable therapy she would have had regular hip perform and the necessity for surgical joint reconstruction would have been delayed to age 50 or 60 with good mobility preserved till her 80s.

In the course of the course of the scientific negligence case, the Defendant disclosed the report of its professional orthopaedic surgeon. The professional expressed some doubt in regards to the Claimant’s signs which had been “not simply defined on an anatomical foundation”. The Defendant investigated Megan’s social media postings and shaped the view that they didn’t assist the impression given in Megan’s proof. The Defendant obtained covert surveillance proof which, with the social media materials, was disclosed in September 2018. The Defendant amended its case to allege basic dishonesty within the presentation of Megan’s declare the place a deceptive impression of Megan’s useful capability and an exaggeration of her incapacity had been given.

Topic to the elemental dishonesty defence, the Defendant admitted legal responsibility for damages of roughly £65,500. The scientific negligence declare was listed for trial in October 2018. The trial was adjourned as a result of an professional was unavailable and relisted to begin on 5 March 2020.

In the meantime, in August 2019 Megan’s declare was amended and valued at £5.4 million (diminished from an preliminary valuation of £7.3 million). Nevertheless, eight working days earlier than trial, a Discover of Discontinuance was served on Megan’s behalf. No clarification was supplied, save that this step had been taken in opposition to authorized recommendation. As Megan was in receipt of authorized assist, the discontinuance prevented the difficulty of basic dishonesty from being decided by the Courtroom. 

As a substitute, the Defendant pursued committal proceedings in opposition to Mrs Colley and asserted that the essence of the alleged false assertion was to magnify Megan’s incapacity and immobility arising from her hip dysplasia. The Defendant claimed the surveillance video proof confirmed that Megan had “grossly regular” mobility when it comes to strolling, utilizing stairs, and accessing public transport. Statements from academics at Megan’s college and faculty indicated that they had been unaware of any particular preparations for Megan.

Mrs Colley stood by her statements. She claimed that Megan achieved the mobility seen within the video proof by elevated use of painkillers and that she had unhealthy days in addition to good days. 

The applying to commit Mrs Colley for contempt of Courtroom on grounds of constructing knowingly false statements was heard by Mr Justice Bourne.  Upon listening to stay proof from numerous witnesses (together with Megan’s college and faculty academics), Bourne J concluded “When all of the proof within the scientific negligence declare is taken into account, it’s completely clear that Megan, by herself and with the assistance of Mrs Colley considerably exaggerated the degrees of incapacity which she was experiencing in the course of the lifetime of the litigation.”

This exaggeration consisted of statements that Megan “attends faculty in her wheelchair, has a full-time instructing assistant who pushes the wheelchair” and “is at the moment reliant upon the usage of a wheelchair when out of the home”. Bourne J held these statements to be false and “That Mrs Colley knew that they had been false when she made them. I’m positive that they had been knowingly made with a view to rising the worth of Megan’s scientific negligence declare and, to the information of Mrs Colley, they thereby interfered with or if endured in would have interfered with the course of justice in a cloth respect”. 

Mrs Colley was discovered responsible of contempt of Courtroom by knowingly making false statements supported by a press release of reality.

Upon contemplating the suitable penalty Bourne J had in thoughts the steering of Moses LJ in South Wales Hearth and Rescue Service -v- Smith [2021].  That steering included the next warning: “The general public and advisors have to be conscious that, nevertheless straightforward it’s to make false claims, both in relation to legal responsibility or in relation to compensation, if discovered the implications for these tempted to take action will likely be disastrous. They’re nearly inevitably sooner or later going to result in sentences of imprisonment, which could have the knock-on impact that the lives of these tempted to behave in that manner, of each themselves and their households are more likely to be ruined.”

With this in thoughts Bourne J recognized 4 questions he was required to reply: (1) whether or not the contempt is severe {that a} fantastic alone can’t be justified, having relating to to hurt and culpability; (2) whether or not a jail sentence is unavoidable; (3) what’s the shortest time period commensurate with the seriousness of the contempt; and (4) if there may be to be a jail sentence, whether or not it may be suspended.

In answering these questions Bourne J held:

• In respect of questions (1) and (2), the Courts have repeatedly mentioned that deception of this sort ought to usually result in a jail sentence. This case was severe and sustained and probably concerned substantial sums. He famous “the deception gave materials assist to a possible improve within the declare’s worth which might have been nicely into six figures”. Mrs Colley resisted the contempt software and due to this fact admitted no deception and made no apology. A fantastic alone couldn’t be justified and a custodial sentence was inevitable.
• As for query (3), the shortest potential sentence could be a sentence of 6 months and Mrs Colley could be entitled to be launched after serving half of that time period. The decide famous “A time period of that size could be mandatory, in my judgment, to mark the seriousness of an try of this sort and of its magnitude to deceive the Courtroom.”
• Lastly, query (4), the private circumstances of Mrs Colley had been thought-about by Bourne J. He concluded his Judgment stating “Mrs Colley after all made a disastrous determination to attempt to assist Megan by exaggerating her declare. The background doesn’t excuse that tragic mistake however it helps me to grasp it. It additionally appears to be inevitable that custody would have a big dangerous influence on all the household and particularly her son. In the meantime, I settle for that these proceedings, over an extended interval, have already had a extreme influence on Mrs Colley. The dearth of any admissions is profoundly regrettable, and locations her at actual threat of an instantaneous jail time period, however there may be some motive to consider that she could have discovered her lesson, in different phrases, an actual prospect of rehabilitation.”

Bourne J sentenced Mrs Colley to imprisonment for six months, suspended for two years provided that no different contempt of Courtroom is dedicated throughout that point. In passing this sentence he said “I hope Mrs Colley understands the distinctive nature of this determination to droop.”

Follow Factors

This case is an efficient instance of how severe the Courtroom takes allegations that events to litigation knowingly make false statements in a doc verified by a press release of reality. Defendants are attuned to potential exaggeration of claims and it’s clear on this case the Defendant’s professional was at a loss to reconcile the anatomical nature of the Claimant’s damage and the outline of her stage of mobility.

This Judgment is a reminder to these concerned in scientific negligence and private damage litigation of the significance to confirm a witness’s account.  An in depth overview of disclosure (together with social media content material and third celebration disclosure) ought to be taken all through the lifetime of the case.

Moreover, warnings ought to be given to shoppers, Litigation Associates and witnesses of the implications of offering false statements in a doc verified by a press release of reality. Colley will not be a one off instance; that is a part of a rising physique of case legislation coping with basic dishonesty and it’ll definitely not be the final phrase the Courtroom could have on this topic.

FURTHER INFORMATION

If you want any additional info or recommendation in regards to the matter mentioned on this weblog, please contact Richard Lodge or our Medical Negligence and Private Harm workforce.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Richard Lodge is a Associate within the Medical Negligence and Private Harm follow and has been recognised throughout the discipline of scientific/medical negligence throughout the Chambers UK and Authorized 500 directories.  He’s an individually ranked lawyer for scientific negligence inside Chambers UK, A Consumer’s Information to the UK Authorized Occupation.