header-logo header-logo

25 July 2019 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7850 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

The MIB’s surrogate state liability (Pt 2)

Dr Nicholas Bevan explains how the Court of Appeal’s ruling in MIB v Lewis casts open the floodgates to compensation
  • The MIB is liable for wide-ranging infringements of EU law within the UK’s compulsory motor insurance regime.
  • The numerous practical implications could prove to be highly disruptive.

In the first part of this series, I considered how the unanimous ruling in MIB v Lewis  [2019] EWCA Civ 909 resolved, in decisive terms, the long-standing controversy over the Motor Insurance Bureau’s (MIB’s) legal status under European law (see Pt 1, NLJ 12 July 2019, p15). The court ruled that the MIB is an emanation of the state that is bound by the direct effect of Articles 3 and 10 of the Sixth Motor Insurance Directive 2009/103 (the Directive). The Directive’s provisions set the standard of the compensatory guarantee mandated under European law for motor accident victims, which the government has failed to fully implement within Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the 1988 Act) and the EC Rights Against

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