header-logo header-logo

20 April 2012 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7510 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Trial & error

Successive governments have failed to protect RTA victims. It’s time to act, says Nicholas Bevan

Two recent conflicting Court of Appeal decisions throw our government’s failure to implement Community law into sharp focus. In the first case, the Court of Appeal applied the correct approach to interpreting our national law in the light of European Community law and revealed a longstanding inconsistency between the compensatory safeguards provided by our state and that prescribed under Community law. That issue was referred to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for guidance. In the second appeal, which was heard 11 months later, a differently constituted Court of Appeal failed to adhere to the principles applied in the first. In doing so it took a wrong path that ultimately lead to its erroneous decision.

The appeals feature three separate road accidents but each had the following in common: 
  • seriously injured passengers claiming against their drivers; 
  • third party motor insurance cover in place for the vehicles in which the passengers were riding;
  • the driver responsible was not covered to drive
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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll