Two measures, never added together: the family elects the higher one against each party. Tap a tooth for its working.

“In my view, it ought now to be recognised that where it can be shown that a judgment has been obtained by fraud, and where no allegation of fraud had been raised at the trial which led to that judgment, a requirement of reasonable diligence should not be imposed on the party seeking to set aside the judgment.” — Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2019] UKSC 13, para 54 (Lord Kerr)

“The principles are, briefly: first, there has to be a ‘conscious and deliberate dishonesty’ in relation to the relevant evidence given, or action taken, statement made or matter concealed, which is relevant to the judgment now sought to be impugned. Secondly, the relevant evidence, action, statement or concealment (performed with conscious and deliberate dishonesty) must be ‘material’. ‘Material’ means that the fresh evidence that is adduced after the first judgment has been given is such that it demonstrates that the previous relevant evidence, action, statement or concealment was an operative cause of the court’s decision to give judgment in the way it did. Put another way, it must be shown that the fresh evidence would have entirely changed the way in which the first court approached and came to its decision. Thus the relevant conscious and deliberate dishonesty must be causative of the impugned judgment being obtained in the terms it was. Thirdly, the question of materiality of the fresh evidence is to be assessed by reference to its impact on the evidence supporting the original decision, not by reference to its impact on what decision might be made if the claim were to be retried on honest evidence.” — RBS v Highland Financial Partners [2013] EWCA Civ 328, para 106 (Aikens LJ), adopted in Takhar, para 56

Time: Limitation Act 1980 s.32(1)(b) — where “any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant”, the period runs from discovery. Human Rights Act 1998 actions (A1P1, Article 8) reach only acts after 2 October 2000.