header-logo header-logo

Phoenix in flames: lessons from Pilling (Pt 2)

23 May 2019 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7841 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance , Brexit
printer mail-detail
In the second part of this special series on R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd, Nicholas Bevan analyses the Supreme Court’s approach to motor policy construction

In the second part of this special series, Nicholas Bevan analyses the Supreme Court’s approach to motor policy construction

The first instalment of this two-part feature on R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd [2019] UKSC 16, considered the restrictive way in which the Supreme Court discharged its duty to give effect to the wider scope of Article 3 of EC Directive 2009/103/EC on motor insurance (the Directive) when construing s 145 of Pt VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) (see Pt 1 in NLJ, 17 May 2019 p9). The court ruled that it was not possible to ‘read down’ s 145 RTA 1988 to extend its geographic scope to require compulsory third-party cover to extend to the use of vehicles on private premises.

The appeal was made in a contribution

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll