header-logo header-logo

08 April 2016 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7693 / Categories: Features , Insurance surgery , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Still driving dangerously

istock_000075134093_web

How can redress be sought for institutionalised illegality by the Department for Transport, asks Nicholas Bevan

Motor accident victims depend on statutory compensatory guarantees that ensure that they will receive their full entitlement. This is achieved primarily through the imposition of compulsory third party motor cover and this responds to the vast majority of claims. The concept was first introduced in the UK in 1930. It was a pragmatic and common-sense innovation devised to protect injured victims from the vagaries of a wrongdoer’s ability to satisfy the damages.

Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) currently defines the scope of the duty to insure and the third party cover this requires. There are also two separate but closely interrelated compensatory schemes devised by the Department for Transport. These are supposed to extend the same compensatory protection to victims of uninsured and untraced drivers. The first of these schemes was introduced in 1946. Both schemes are managed by the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB), whose role is defined by a series of private

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

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
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll