Further to my (Andrew Gibbs-Ripley) previous article on the subject, the decision against Greyson v Fuller has now become available. The result will be of great relief to claimant firms out there as the High Court, on appeal, endorsed the more permissive approach taken by HHJ Petts in the Cardiff County Court. The effect of this decision is that a failure to disclose further medical reports without first disclosing the initial fixed costs medical report will not be automatically fatal to the rest of the evidence.
This is not to say that the effect of the judgment is to exonerate claimants altogether. Any failure to disclose reports in the correct order can still be met with a costs sanction, meaning that claimants will be allowed to rely on further reports, save for not being able to claim the costs of those further reports.
The above is important as it means that cases involving substantial multiple reports, especially expensive ones from specialists, will not be able to be claimed from the defendant’s insurer. In order to avoid this situation, it is still essential to ensure that the first report is disclosed first. However, in the event that mistakes happen, the decision in this case will still allow a claim to progress.
Andrew Gibbs-Ripley
07.02.2022