Key Point

Failure to comply with para 7.8A of the RTA Protocol was neither serious nor significant, relief granted

NB Appeal heard 19th April 2021 and judgment awaited

Greyson v Fuller

HHJ Petts, Cardiff CC, 10th February 2021

Please note that this finding has been appealed to the High Court and judgment from that appeal is awaited.

A Claimant in a soft tissue injury claim failed to disclose a first report before a subsequent report, so were held to be in breach of para 7.8A of the RTA Protocol.  That breach meant the subsequent report was not 'justified'.  The judge disagreed with Mason v Laing where the court had found it had no discretion to admit the later reports, because clearly 7.1(3) of PD8B gave the judge discretion to admit a subsequent report.  The judge also allowed the claimant Relief from Sanction - perhaps in part because he took the view that the Defendant had been opportunistic in taking a point after the event which it had not objected to at the time.  He found the breach was not serious, it was at the lower end of the scale and had caused no prejudice to the Defendant.  Notably, the breach had not had any impact on the efficient conduct of the claim or the proportionality of costs, again holding loss of trial date as the Holy Grail.

Click here for a copy

of the judgment

Go back to Main Index

Main Index

Go back to Topic Index

Topic Index