header-logo header-logo

01 December 2017 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7772 / Categories: Opinion , Insurance / reinsurance , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Defending the indefensible

nlj_7772_bevan

Nicholas Bevan regrets that an opportunity has been missed & justice has not been done

Mr Justice Ouseley delivered his judgment in RoadPeace v Secretary of State for Transport [2017] EWHC 2725 (Admin) on 7 November 2017. This judicial review was brought when the minister ignored RoadPeace’s repeated requests to remove two unlawful exclusions of liability from the Uninsured Drivers Agreement 2015 and to bring the UK’s regulation of motor insurance policies and the compensatory schemes operated by the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) into line with the minimum standard set by the Motor Insurance Directive 2009/103/EC (the Directive). The minister had been fully briefed by several well-informed sources about the systemic defects in the UK’s implementation of the Directive, within his own February 2013 consultation on the MIB agreements.

By the time the case was heard, in February 2017, the defendant had been compelled to concede that the statutory regulation of motor insurers and the private law arrangements with the MIB for compensating victims of uninsured or untraced drivers do not conform with the Directive.

In December 2016, the defendant consulted on amending the

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll