The victim of an unidentified hit and run driver has lost her claim at the Supreme Court, in a case welcomed by insurance lawyers.
The case, Cameron v Hussain [2019] UKSC 6 concerned a collision in 2013 between Miss Cameron’s car and a Nissan Micra. The Micra did not stop but a passing driver took down its number plate. It was registered in the name of Naveed Hussain.
Hussain’s insurer challenged Cameron’s claim on the grounds it could not be proved that Hussain was the driver. Cameron sought to amend her claim to the ‘the person unknown driving vehicle….’.
The case centred on the issue of whether a claimant can bring a claim against an unnamed defendant if the claimant has been the victim of an unidentified hit and run driver, and the car the unidentified driver was driving is covered by an insurance policy, albeit one in the name of someone untraceable. Overturning the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court unanimously held that such a claim cannot be brought.
Damian Ward, partner at Keoghs, which acted for the insurer in the case, said: ‘It is long-established that the victim of an untraced driver in the UK has protection in the various forms of the Untraced Drivers Agreement.
‘What would have presented as an open goal to fraudsters has been instead determined as a rejection of the challenge to the existing compensation framework for victims of untraced drivers in RTA cases, and of the UK’s failure to lawfully implement the Sixth EC Motor Insurance Directive.’
Welcoming the decision, Ian Davies, partner at Kennedys, said: ‘We have returned to the established approach and insurers’ systems and processes should not need to be amended.’
Kennedys partner Mark Walsh said: ‘The judgment is unequivocal.
‘It is now abundantly clear that the issuing and service of proceedings by the claimant is simply not permitted in circumstances where the existence of the proceedings could never be brought to the attention of the defendant, and that substituted service on the defendant insurer is not an effective solution.’
