header-logo header-logo

18 April 2013 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7556 / Categories: Opinion , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Asleep at the wheel?

coverlarge

The government is driving dangerously, says Nicholas Bevan

Road traffic accident practitioners could be forgiven if the department for transport’s consultation paper on updating parts of the Uninsured Drivers Agreement 1999 and the Untraced Drivers Agreement 2003 had escaped their notice (see Review of the Uninsured and Untraced Drivers’ Agreements).

It is regrettable that the consultation paper restricts its scope to a relatively small number of largely peripheral procedural issues confined to claims against uninsured and unidentified drivers. It makes no attempt to address the many egregious defects in the protection afforded to victims; both within these Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) agreements as well as within Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and the European Communities (Rights against Insurers) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/3061).

The plain fact of the matter is that the UK’s statutory and extra-statutory provision is not only out of keeping with the original parliamentary objectives of the Road Traffic Act 1930 but it also fails to meet the minimum standards imposed by the Sixth Motor Insurance

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll