header-logo header-logo

Putting wrongs to rights (Pt 1)

27 May 2016 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7700 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail
nlj_7700_bevan

In the first of two articles, Nicholas Bevan explains why he believes the MIB is liable for defects in the Road Traffic Act

Motor accident victims are entitled to claim compensation directly from the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) for incidents that ought to be covered by the compulsory third party insurance provisions of Pt VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) but where, due to the secretary of state for transport’s inaction, they are not.

Longstanding non-conformity

Between them, ss 143 and 145 RTA 1988 prescribe the nature and extent of the compulsory third party motor vehicle insurance requirement. This confines its geographic scope to use in public places (see s 185) and it is further restricted to motor vehicles intended or adapted for road use (see s 192). However, these constraints are clearly incompatible with the broader scope of the European Directive (2009/103/EC) on motor insurance (the Directive).

Articles 3 and 10 of the Directive set out the scope of the third party motor insurance requirement as well as the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll