‘Personal injury law firms and insurers look unlikely to have sight of the new rules governing the whiplash portal until May as they were not signed off at this month’s meeting of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC), it has emerged.’
Legal Futures, 17th March 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘On 13.2.20 the Supreme Court (Lord Reed (President), Lady Arden and Lord Hamblen JJSC) refused the MIB’s application for permission to appeal against a finding that it was directly liable under EU law for injuries sustained by a pedestrian who was struck by an uninsured vehicle on private land. At the same time, it concluded that it was not necessary to refer the case for any ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union. As a result, David Knifton QC (who acted for the Claimant) explains, the MIB has exhausted all avenues of appeal, and will have to meet Mr Lewis’s claim for the catastrophic injuries he suffered.’
Exchange Chambers, 20th February 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has confirmed that insurers can be liable for accidents on private land even where the driver is not covered – but the long-running issue may not be over yet.’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th February 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Children and protected parties are to be exempt from the increase in the small claims limit and the new whiplash portal – at least for now – Legal Futures can reveal.’
Legal Futures, 8th July 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The whiplash portal for litigants in person will cover claims for property damage, in addition to personal injury and uninsured losses, the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) has confirmed.’
Legal Futures, 2nd July 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has upheld a ruling that the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) has to pay compensation to a man injured by an uninsured vehicle, even though it was on private land.’
Litigation Futures, 5th June 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) has to pay compensation to a man injured by an uninsured vehicle, even though it was on private land, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 4th October 2018
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In Howe v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2017] EWCA obligation 932, Mr Howe was driving a lorry in France on 30 March 2007 when a wheel detached from a lorry in front of him. The resulting accident left him paraplegic. Neither the other vehicle nor its driver was ever traced. He submitted a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau and its French equivalent, but after a time he was told by the French that his claim was out of time. Consequently, he issued proceedings against the British MIB directly, seeking to enforce his rights under regulation 13 of the Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 (the regulations). That claim was struck out because it was out of time. The MIB now sought to recover its costs of defending the proceedings.’
Law Society's Gazette, 24th July 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The new agreements come into force for accidents occurring after 1 March 2017. They were published on 13 January 2017 with the following statement:
MIB paying a claim for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car when it has been caused by another uninsured or a ‘hit and run’ driver seems counter-intuitive. However, from 1 March 2017 that is what MIB will be required to do.
Paul Ryman-Tubb, Chief Technical Officer at MIB said: “Whilst we will deal with these claims in a professional manner, the principle of using honest premium paying motorists money to pay for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car seems crazy.”’
Zenith PI Blog, 21st February 2017
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘If an injured person cannot identify the fault driver of another vehicle, this is the agreement which governs their rights to compensation. In many instances, this is because the accident was a classic “hit and run”; indeed the MIB have stated that 12% of accidents in which the accident was reported to the police and a person was injured were such “hit and run accidents”. (That statistic is not as significant as it would seem at first blush; the majority of relatively minor road traffic accidents are not reported to police; the reason that such accidents are reported is that the other vehicle has made off without stopping so to a certain extent it is a self-selecting criteria). No details of the fault vehicle or the driver tend to have been obtained or recorded so an injured person’s only option would be the Untraced Driver’s Agreement.’
Park Square Barristers, 8th February 2017
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Peter Allchorne translates the message from Moreno v Motor Insurers’ Bureau for motor accident victims.’
New Law Journal, 17th August 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘The Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) has welcomed the clarity provided today by a Supreme Court ruling that damages for a UK resident badly injured by an uninsured driver in Greece should be assessed under Greek law.’
Litigation Futures, 3rd August 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Caroline Wood considers the recent Court of Appeal decision concerning the liability of the MIB where an insurer has become insolvent.’
Park Square Barristers, 3rd June 2016
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘A new Uninsured Drivers’ Agreement comes into force on 1 August 2015 which applies to accidents occurring on or after that date.’
Zenith PI, 13th July 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
Moreno v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2015] EWHC 1002 (QB); [2015] WLR (D) 177
‘The scope of the defendant’s liability to the claimant under regulation 13(2) of the Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 was to be determined in accordance with the law of England and Wales and not the law of the country where the accident occurred.’
WLR Daily, 17th April 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Byrne v Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Another
Court of Appeal
“The procedure for making a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau for compensation in respect of injury caused by an untraced driver should be subject to a limitation period no less favourable than that which applied to the commencement of proceedings by minors for personal injury in tort against a traced driver.”
The Times, 2nd July 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
UK in breach of uninsured drivers’ duty
Byrne v. Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Another
Queen’s Bench Division
“Failure by the United Kingdom to comply with the Second European Directive on motor insurance rendered it liable in damages.”
The Times, 15th June 2007
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Byrne v. Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2007] EWHC 1268 (QB)
“The procedure for making a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau for compensation in respect of injury caused by an untraced driver under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 1972, which procedure was relied on by the United Kingdom as implementing art 1(4) of Council Directive 84/5/EEC, should be subject to a limitation period no less favourable than that which applied under s 28 of the Limitation Act 1980 to the commencement of proceedings by minors for personal injury in tort against a traced driver. Because the three-year time limit for the bringing of a claim under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 1972 was not compliant with art 1(4) of the Directive, which was capable of having direct effect, the United Kingdom was in sufficiently serious breach of its Community law obligations to give rise in principle to a liability for damages.”
WLR Daily, 7th June 2007
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
© Inner Temple Library 2024