In his final article on compensation for motor victims, Nicholas Bevan compares & contrasts UK & EU provisions
There is a strong case to argue that the Uninsured Drivers Agreement 1999 (the 1999 agreement) is part and parcel of our national law and thus subject to the Marleasing interpretive principle (see Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA [1990] ECR I-4135) and that the normal rules of construction that apply to private agreements produce the same purposive outcome anyway. Furthermore, as the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) is probably an emanation of state, any material departure from the minimum levels of compensatory protection prescribed by the Motor Vehicle Insurance Directives (MVIDs) is directly enforceable by the courts. Even if direct effect does not apply, the UK government is liable for losses sustained by claimants through its failure to properly implement the MVIDs under Francovich and others [1991] ECR 1-5357.
It is arguable, following the ECJ ruling in Churchill, that the 1999 agreement is now confined to the dwindling number of claims where there is no insurance in place;
