Key authorities include Stevens v Equity Syndicate Management for the eight principles, Zurich v Umerji on impecuniosity, Pattni v First Leicester Buses on intervention, and the recent Wiltshire v Aioi Nissay Dowa [2025] EWCC 13 which warned against template-driven witness statements. The case law continues to develop, particularly around BHR evidence standards.
What are the eight principles in credit hire cases?
The eight principles were set out by the Court of Appeal to guide credit hire disputes. They cover the claimant's duty to mitigate, the recoverability of credit hire rates, the approach to impecuniosity, and critically, that the defendant must prove the Basic Hire Rate through direct evidence rather than assumption.
What happened in Wiltshire v Aioi Nissay Dowa [2025] and why does it matter?
In this 2025 case, the claimant's credit hire claims failed almost entirely because of template-driven witness statements and poor claims handling. The court criticised "blind following of a company process" and awarded only a fraction of what was claimed. It is a cautionary example of why every witness statement needs to be case-specific, not just a filled-in template.
What is impecuniosity in credit hire?
Impecuniosity is the financial inability of a claimant to pay for a hire vehicle on the open market. Where impecuniosity is established, the claimant may recover the full credit hire rate rather than being limited to the BHR. The test asks whether the claimant could have paid hire charges without making unreasonable sacrifices.
See how LegalDocs Assist handles real credit hire scenarios.