header-logo header-logo

Phoenix in flames: lessons from Pilling (Pt 2)

23 May 2019 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7841 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance , Brexit
printer mail-detail
In the second part of this special series on R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd, Nicholas Bevan analyses the Supreme Court’s approach to motor policy construction

In the second part of this special series, Nicholas Bevan analyses the Supreme Court’s approach to motor policy construction

The first instalment of this two-part feature on R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd [2019] UKSC 16, considered the restrictive way in which the Supreme Court discharged its duty to give effect to the wider scope of Article 3 of EC Directive 2009/103/EC on motor insurance (the Directive) when construing s 145 of Pt VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) (see Pt 1 in NLJ, 17 May 2019 p9). The court ruled that it was not possible to ‘read down’ s 145 RTA 1988 to extend its geographic scope to require compulsory third-party cover to extend to the use of vehicles on private premises.

The appeal was made in a contribution

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll