header-logo header-logo

22 February 2013 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7549 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

On the right road (Pt IV)

In his final article on compensation for motor victims, Nicholas Bevan compares & contrasts UK & EU provisions

There is a strong case to argue that the Uninsured Drivers Agreement 1999 (the 1999 agreement) is part and parcel of our national law and thus subject to the Marleasing interpretive principle (see Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA [1990] ECR I-4135) and that the normal rules of construction that apply to private agreements produce the same purposive outcome anyway. Furthermore, as the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) is probably an emanation of state, any material departure from the minimum levels of compensatory protection prescribed by the Motor Vehicle Insurance Directives (MVIDs) is directly enforceable by the courts.  Even if direct effect does not apply, the UK government is liable for losses sustained by claimants through its failure to properly implement the MVIDs under Francovich and others [1991] ECR 1-5357.

It is arguable, following the ECJ ruling in Churchill, that the 1999 agreement is now confined to the dwindling

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

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Robert Dransfield

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Robert Dransfield

London medical negligence practice strengthened by senior partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—seven appointments

DAC Beachcroft—seven appointments

Firm boosts professional risk practice with team hire in Manchester, led by partner Ben Parks

Doyle Clayton—Benedicte Perowne

Doyle Clayton—Benedicte Perowne

Workplace law firm appoints new head of regulatory team

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll