Experience

Anthony specialises in Multi-Track matters involving a personal injury or fatal accident element. He has extensive experience of higher value litigation, having brokered favourable settlements in six-figure claims on several occasions for both Claimants and Defendants. He regularly acts in cases involving complex medical evidence, including chronic pain, brain injury and mesothelioma claims. He is particularly well known for his expertise in insurance fraud litigation.

Education

MA Jurisprudence- Trinity College, University of Oxford

Professional Memberships

Personal Injury Bar Association
London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association
South Eastern Circuit

Hodgson v. Kinley

Anthony Johnson (instructed by Patrick Maguire of Silverbeck Rymer) acted for the successful Claimant in an appeal against a trial judge’s decision to dismiss a claim where it had been found that the Claimant sustained some injury in the index accident but some injury in a previous accident, and where the medical evidence did not distinguish between the two.

The basis of the decision at first instance had been that the Claimant could not prove that her injury was sustained in the index accident. HHJ Butler accepted that such an approach was illogical and contrary to law, and that instead the judge should have done her best to make some kind of ‘rough and ready’ assessment based upon whatever limited evidence was available. The fact that it was difficult to quantify damages was not the same thing as it being impossible.

Bourne Leisure v. Shakespeare Unreported

Anthony Johnson successfully represented the Respondent who had slipped on liquid that had been spilled on the dancefloor at the Defendant’s Butlins Bognor Regis resort. Butterfield J. upheld the trial judge’s decision that the Appellant was liable to the Respondent under section 2(2) of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 on account of the fact that the Defendant’s inspection regime was insufficient, and that the Defendant should have taken some steps, albeit minor ones that would not ruin the atmosphere in the venue, to enforce its policy of preventing guests from taking drinks onto the dancefloor given the obvious risk of spillage. He rejected the Appellant’s submissions that the trial judge had imposed too high a duty on the Defendant that was effectively a counsel of perfection, and that any reasonably practicable improvements to the Defendant’s system would not have made a difference in any event.

Lawrence v. Kent CC [2012] EWCA CIV 493 - Court of Appeal

Guidance given by Court of Appeal upon the approach appellate court should take to appeals on questions of contested fact determined by the Trial Judge as opposed to matters of discretion

Kent County Council v. Lawrence [2011] EWHC 1590

Anthony Johnson represented the Claimant in this appeal against a determination in her favour in a tripping claim brought under the Highways Act 1980. Eady J. held that the trial judge had not misunderstood the nature of the statutory duty and had not applied the wrong test, but that he had taken into account an irrelevant consideration, namely the subjective opinions of eye-witnesses about the danger posed by the defect. This aspect of the decision was subsequently overruled by the Court of Appeal.

Smith v. KRG Transport

Anthony Johnson represented the Defendant in the first appeal of this matter when HHJ Griggs overturned a District Judge’s decision that the Claimant had acted reasonably in mitigation of his losses by hiring a vehicle for 285 days in circumstances where he did not use the cheque that he eventually received from the Defendant’s insurers to replace his own accident-damaged vehicle.

Balls v. St. Edmundsbury Borough Council LTL: AC0122698

As far as the writer is aware, this is the only reported decision dealing with the interpretation of the definition of the term “highway” for the purposes of section 41 of the Highways Act 1980.

Hussain v. Dhawan LTL: AC0119878

Test case in which Anthony Johnson successfully resisted the Claimant’s claim for diminution in value on the basis that he had failed to make out his claim, in spite of the fact that an engineer had examined his vehicle and prepared a ‘diminution report’. The judgment discusses the considerations that apply to such claims in general.

Good v. De Klee LTL: AC0115494

The District Judge rejected the Claimant’s diminution claim on the basis that his ‘expert’ engineer had not actually examined the vehicle in question, and thus his report was based entirely upon theory and speculation. This was one of the first ‘modern’ reported cases dealing with a new wave of diminution in value claims.

TGC Fraud Update v3 – June 2016

22nd June 2016

Stemming the tide of the fraud.
Please see link below for the third edition of TGC Fraud Update, a publication we have set up with the stated aim of facilitating the sharing of information about decided claims involving issues of road traffic fraud and related matters.


View External Link

TGC Fraud Update February 2016

3rd February 2016

Facing up to the challenge of fraud rings.
Please see link below for the second edition of TGC Fraud Update, a publication which was set up with the stated aim of facilitating the sharing of information about decided claims involving issues of road traffic fraud and related matters. Thank you also for all of the kind words and helpful feedback received about the inaugural edition.

 


View External Link

TGC Fraud Update

9th October 2015

Welcome to the inaugural edition of TGC Fraud Update, a new publication from the fraud team at Temple Garden Chambers containing a number of articles on legal matters relevant to insurance fraud practitioners and a digest of recent noteworthy cases in which Members of Chambers have been involved.


View External Link

“A Sword and A Shield- awards of exemplary damages in fraud cases”- New Law Journal

6th December 2013

This article comments upon the use of exemplary damages claims as another tool in the arsenal of Defendant insurers when faced with a fraudulent Claimant and considers some of the issues that commonly arise in such claims.


“Measuring loss: vehicle diminution claims”- New Law Journal

16th May 2008

This article concerns the principles that should be applied to the measure of loss in vehicle diminution matters, an area where claims are commonly presented, but where there has been only limited guidance from the higher courts.


Severely Injured Claimant Recovers £1.14M

27th March 2017

Jonathan Watt-Pringle QC and Anthony Johnson (instructed by Richard Foyster of Ashtons Legal) represented the Claimant in this employer’s liability matter that settled for £1,425,000 on a 100% basis (£1,140,000 net of a previously agreed 80:20 liability split agreed between the parties) following a JSM attended by both Counsel.

Read more

Personal Injury Claim Settled for £230,000

20th December 2016

Anthony Johnson (instructed by Steven Akerman of Brian Barr Solicitors) represented the Claimant and Richard Wilkinson (instructed by John Lezemore of DWF LLP) the Defendant in this complex personal injury claim in which liability, causation and quantum were all heavily disputed. The matter eventually settled in the gross sum of £230,000 at a Joint Settlement Meeting that took place on 13th December 2016.

Read more

Personal Injury Claim Settled for £180,000

13th October 2016

Anthony Johnson (instructed by Richard Foyster of Ashtons) represented the Claimant and Sian Reeves (instructed by Francois Liebenberg of the Government Legal Department) the Defendant in this personal injury claim that arose from injuries sustained by a 35-year-old Traffic Examiner in the course of her employment with the Department for Transport. Liability was admitted soon after the accident and the matter eventually settled in the gross sum of £180,000 at a Joint Settlement Meeting that took place on 11th October 2016.

Read more

TGC Fraud Update v3 – June 2016

22nd June 2016

Stemming the tide of the fraud.

Please see link below for the third edition of TGC Fraud Update, a publication we have set up with the stated aim of facilitating the sharing of information about decided claims involving issues of road traffic fraud and related matters.


View External Link