Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc [2016]

Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc [2016] UKSC 48 is a Supreme Court case that addressed a legal dispute stemming from an injury suffered by Mr Hayward at work in June 1998.

Despite admitting liability, Mr Hayward deliberately and dishonestly exaggerated the extent of his injury to secure a higher settlement figure of £134,973.11 from Zurich Insurance Company plc, the employer's liability insurer. At the time of the settlement in October 2003, the insurer had video evidence of the exaggeration. Subsequently, by February 2009, the insurer gathered additional evidence demonstrating that Mr Hayward had fully recovered a year before the settlement. Seeking to set aside the settlement and claiming damages for deceit, the insurer faced legal challenges as Mr Hayward contended that the claim had been compromised in previous proceedings.

Initially, the County Court ruled in favour of Mr Hayward, granting summary judgment to dismiss the insurer's claim. However, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision, allowing the insurer's claim to proceed. The trial judge, on the merits of the claim, found that Mr Hayward had intentionally exaggerated his injury, leading to the setting aside of the settlement agreement and the awarding of a reduced sum of £14,720. A second Court of Appeal, however, sided with Mr Hayward, asserting that the insurer should not be allowed to set aside the settlement since it was aware of the fraud at that time.

The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the insurer's appeal, restoring the judge's conclusion to set aside the settlement agreement and awarding Mr Hayward the reduced sum. Lord Clarke provided the lead judgment, with Lord Toulson delivering a concurring judgment. The critical issue under consideration was whether the insurer needed to prove a belief in the truth of Mr Hayward's misrepresentations to set aside the compromise based on fraudulent misrepresentation. The Court concluded that such a belief was not a freestanding requirement and that the representee's state of mind was relevant but not necessarily decisive in determining inducement and causation.

Lord Toulson, in his concurring judgment, emphasised that the central issue was whether a suspicious insurer, settling a claim with the expectation of success but later discovering fraud, could set aside the settlement and seek damages for deceit. He highlighted the need to demonstrate that the false representation caused the insurer to act to its detriment, with inducement being a factual question pertaining to causation. The Court did not explicitly decide whether knowledge of the falsity of a representation would always preclude a representee from proving inducement.

In summary, the case clarified the requirements for setting aside a settlement based on fraudulent misrepresentation and emphasised the significance of inducement and causation in such cases, while also addressing the role of the representee's state of mind.
Back to blog

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Yale University
Council of Europe
Baker Mckenzie 
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.