One of the consequences of the UK adversarial legal system is that parties are expected and encouraged to pursue their case as forcefully as is possible. There can be occasions however when either a claimant or defendant will overstep the boundary and resort to dishonest means. This could involve fabricating evidence, forging or destroying documents or just simply lying. The question will then arise as to the approach the court will take in response to such dishonest conduct by a party.
If a claimant brings a claim to court reliant on facts which can be shown to be false the defendant is likely to want to have the claim struck out. The court will not however automatically grant such an application. The court will consider whether there is sufficient other evidence to maintain a claim if the tainted evidence is excluded. The claim will not be struck out simply because the claimant has told an untruth. It is only where there is insufficient evidence to support a claim once the false evidence has been excluded that the court will strike out the proceedings.
Notwithstanding these general principles, the Court of Appeal in the recent case of Arrow Nominees v Blackledge has held: