Nicholas Bevan calls into question a recent Court of Appeal ruling on the liability of a motor insurer to compensate a third party victim of an unauthorised driver
- Unanimous but erroneous Court of Appeal ruling that a motor insurer not liable to compensate a third party victim of an unauthorised driver.
- Court of Appeal fails to apply an EU law consistent construction of the Road Traffic Act 1988 for the third time in five years.
- Guidance from the Supreme Court needed.
In Sahin v Havard v Riverstone Insurance (UK) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 1202, [2016] All ER (D) 21 (Dec) it fell to the Court of Appeal to decide whether the motor insurers on risk for a hire vehicle were liable to satisfy an outstanding judgment against a customer. The Court of Appeal decided, unanimously but in the author’s view erroneously, that the insurer was not liable.
On 24 January 2008 Mr Sahin’s Chrysler minicab was damaged in a road accident. He incurred extensive hire charges and repair costs. The vehicle responsible
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
