header-logo header-logo

01 September 2017 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7759 / Categories: Opinion , EU , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Third party motor claims: inception deception

Motor insurers must bear the risk of policyholder fraud, says Nicholas Bevan

  • Third party motor claims are immune to policyholder fraud or misrepresentation.
  • ​​ECJ ruling has far reaching implications for sections 151 and 152 Road Traffic Act 1988.

Can a motor insurer invoke its policyholder’s fraud to defend a third-party claim? ‘Yes’ according to the Court of Appeal’s interpretation of Pt VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) in both EUI Ltd v Bristol Alliance Ltd Partnership [2012] EWCA Civ 1267, [2012] All ER (D) 120 (Oct) and Sahin v Havard & anor [2016] EWCA Civ 1202, [2016] All ER (D) 21 (Dec). In both cases it was held that the compensatory guarantee imposed by s 151 of RTA 1988 can even be circumvented by contractual exclusions and restrictions in cover. However, this orthodoxy was turned on its head by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 20 July 2017. The ECJ has ruled that a national laws that permit motor insurers to deny a third-party claim

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
The Environment Agency can prosecute offences beyond environmental legislation where proceedings support its statutory functions, the Divisional Court has confirmed
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll