header-logo header-logo

Ruling equips claimants with new right of action

26 October 2017
Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Insurance surgery , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
nlj_7767_cover

The European Court of Justice ruling in Farrell v Whitty (C-413/15), this month, fixes the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) with a completely new liability to compensate motor accident victims aff ected by the government’s longstanding failure to implement the European Motor Insurance Directives (the Directives) properly, according to insurance expert Dr Nicholas Bevan.

Bevan, a solicitor, said: ‘In Farrell the court ruled that the Irish compensating body, MIB of Ireland, was subject to the direct eff ect of the Directives. This means that it is now liable to compensate victims of vehicles that are uninsured in circumstances wrongly excluded from compulsory insurance in Ireland. The MIB was set up in almost identical circumstances.

‘Hitherto it was settled law that the MIB was not an emanation of the state and thus not vicariously liable for the government’s legislative shortcomings in this way.’

Bevan continued: ‘Farrell is the most important ruling on state liability for over a quarter century. Its impact extends beyond the Motor Insurance Directives it addresses. Its effect is to extend the range of organisations that are capable of being pinned with a direct liability to compensate individuals adversely aff ected by a state’s failure to implement a Directive. It equips claimants with a new right of action grounded in EU law.’ (State liability: betwixt & between Brexit)

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll