header-logo header-logo

08 February 2013 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7547 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

On the right road? (Pt II)

Nicholas Bevan continues his series on compensating RTA victims & finds our national law provision wanting

The terms, scope and workings of the UK government’s compensation guarantee has preoccupied legislators, the judiciary and legal practitioners alike since the first Road Traffic Act introduced in 1930 (RTA 1930). In the UK this provision has evolved over the years to produce four distinct compensatory safety nets. The first two consist of statutory rights. Between them, they confer on a victim a direct right to recover compensation from the defendant’s insurer and they are to be found within Pt VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988). The third and fourth are delivered by a completely different route: through two extra-statutory compensation schemes devised specifically for victims of uninsured and unidentified drivers. The distinction between the two different types of scheme (statutory and extra-statutory) is relevant to the way one interprets them because different rules of construction are said to apply. This article concentrates on the first two statutory schemes.

The contractual

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll