Perry v Raleys Solicitors

Posted on: 14 February 2019

On Wednesday 13 February, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal in the case of Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5.

Lord Briggs took the opportunity to make a timely reminder that “the court simply has no business for awarding dishonest claimants”, even going so far as to comment on Parliament's intervention on the sphere of whiplash claims.

The theme of trust used throughout the appeal extended to discussions around the original trial judge's findings. The Supreme Court reiterated the point that this judge at first instance, is almost always best placed to have heard the fullness of the case.

How does this notion apply outside the courtroom?
The principle can be applied to the idea that the appointed solicitor conducting a case should be in the best position to make judgements regarding its prospects of success and to advise on the best way forward.

Lord Briggs also reiterated the dicta of LJ Lewison in Fage UK Ltd v Chobani UK Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 5; and similarly any ATE insurer is very much “island hopping" in comparison to the solicitor, with regard to having access to “the whole of the sea of evidence presented".

Putting this into practice, dealing only with law firms with high levels of expertise, Allianz Legal Protection is able to allow fee earners to steer the ship whilst we ensure the lifeboats are on standby if needed!

Sian Brookes - Solicitor Liaison Officer, ALP

Share this article: