header-logo header-logo

14 August 2013 / Andrew Ritchie KC
Issue: 7573 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Against the odds

Dealing with the MIB under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 2003 has become much clearer after a recent arbitration ruling. Andrew Ritchie QC reports

Untraced drivers cases are generally thought to be difficult and unprofitable for lawyers acting for the applicant because the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) gathers all of the evidence and then decides the award. The claimant’s lawyers are excluded from the evidence-gathering process (unless the claimant wants to pay them personally) and only receive the fixed fee. If the award is appealed, it goes to arbitration and, if requested, a full oral hearing. If the applicant is successful, normal legal costs are awarded.

 

A better way

Dealing with the MIB under the Untraced Drivers’ Agreement 2003 (UDA 2003) has become much clearer post- Andrews v MIB [2012] . Here, after a three-day arbitration hearing before Jeremy Stuart-Smith QC, the applicant, a paraplegic, won on liability and causation. Two months later, despite the MIB trying to restrict the applicant’s costs, he was awarded his normal legal costs and disbursements. Five months

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll