Not an appeal in relation to a credit hire claim, but one with potential consequences for the doctrine of ‘ex turpi causa non oritu actio’ is a case that was argued before The Supreme Court on 12th and 13th May.
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio is a legal doctrine which provides that a claimant will be unable to pursue a legal remedy if that remedy arises in connection with his own illegal act.
It is relevant in credit hire cases where, for example, the claimant was driving a car that was not insured or had an expired MOT and so its use on the road was illegal. The doctrine is sometimes referred to as the illegality defence, since an insurer might argue that because the claimant broke a law whilst using his vehicle, the consequences of that illegality are that he cannot bring an action for damages against a tortfeasor.
The UK Supreme Court provided a thorough reconsideration of the doctrine in 2016 in Patel v Mirza  UKSC 42. Judgment in the appeal of Elicia Henderson (a protected party, by her Litigation Friend the Official Solicitor) v Dorset Healthcare Univeristy NHS Foundation Trust was reserved.