header-logo header-logo

Ruling equips claimants with new right of action

26 October 2017
Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Insurance surgery , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
nlj_7767_cover

The European Court of Justice ruling in Farrell v Whitty (C-413/15), this month, fixes the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) with a completely new liability to compensate motor accident victims aff ected by the government’s longstanding failure to implement the European Motor Insurance Directives (the Directives) properly, according to insurance expert Dr Nicholas Bevan.

Bevan, a solicitor, said: ‘In Farrell the court ruled that the Irish compensating body, MIB of Ireland, was subject to the direct eff ect of the Directives. This means that it is now liable to compensate victims of vehicles that are uninsured in circumstances wrongly excluded from compulsory insurance in Ireland. The MIB was set up in almost identical circumstances.

‘Hitherto it was settled law that the MIB was not an emanation of the state and thus not vicariously liable for the government’s legislative shortcomings in this way.’

Bevan continued: ‘Farrell is the most important ruling on state liability for over a quarter century. Its impact extends beyond the Motor Insurance Directives it addresses. Its effect is to extend the range of organisations that are capable of being pinned with a direct liability to compensate individuals adversely aff ected by a state’s failure to implement a Directive. It equips claimants with a new right of action grounded in EU law.’ (State liability: betwixt & between Brexit)

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll