fbpx

Insurer Not Liable Where Driver Unidentifiable

29th May 2019 By Arman Khosravi

In order to sue someone, they have to be served with a notice of claim unless the service of the notice can be properly dispensed with.

Can the notice of claim be properly dispensed with if the person being claimed against is not only unidentified, but unidentifiable? In a recent case, the Supreme Court decided the answer was no.

The case arose after a traffic accident which was the fault of the driver of a Nissan Micra. Another driver was injured but had failed to take the particulars of the driver who was at fault, and that person has never been traced because the car’s owner has refused to say who was driving it at the time.

The car was insured with a leading insurer, but the name on the policy was not that of the owner of the car, and is believed to be a fictitious person. The injured woman sued the owner of the car for damages, later adding the insurer to the claim.

The owner of the car was not the driver and does not have insurance for it, so the insurer denied liability. The injured woman sought to bring the claim against ‘the person unknown driving vehicle registration number Y598 SPS who collided with vehicle registration number KG03 ZJZ on 26 May 2013’.

The result was a legal battle that ended in the Supreme Court, which ruled that the woman’s only right of action was against the Motor Insurers’ Bureau, a body set up to provide compensation (which is typically much less than that resulting from claims against insurers) where the vehicle is uninsured or the driver responsible is untraceable.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Award That Requires Borrowing Made Into Court Order

17th May, 2024 By

Disagreements between separating couples all too often result in litigation that substantially reduces the assets available to them, as was illustrated by a case that recently reached the High Court. At issue was whether awards made by arbitrators in financial remedy proceedings can be made into court orders even if that would require one of the parties to borrow money. The couple had previously had a relationship lasting a few years before resuming their relationship in 2015. They had two children before separating again in 2019. Following their separation, the...

Inheritance Disputes – Costs Risks Can Be Reduced

15th May, 2024 By

Arguments about what someone promised before their death can lead to significant legal costs. However, if faced with a claim against the estate, there may be steps the beneficiaries or executors can take to reduce the risks, as a recent High Court case illustrated. A man had left a farmhouse and agricultural land in Cornwall to his wife, with whom he had also jointly owned a neighbouring area of land. After his death, one of the couple's daughters and her husband claimed that he had told them he wanted them...

Share Rounding Error Does Not Prevent CGT Relief

13th May, 2024 By

There are often very specific rules that must be complied with in order to claim tax reliefs, but if a small mistake arises, the courts may be able to provide assistance. In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found that an investor was entitled to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the disposal of his shares in a company, despite owning one share fewer than he needed to qualify for it. The investor had agreed to purchase 5 per cent of the shares in the company for £500,000. He wished to own...

Wife Entitled to Maintenance Until Sale of Family Home

10th May, 2024 By

When divorcing couples disagree on how assets should be divided, the courts will seek to arrive at a fair outcome for both parties. In deciding how the proceeds of sale of a former couple's home should be apportioned, the Family Court agreed with the wife that she should receive maintenance payments until the sale took place. The couple had married in 2006. Following a brief separation, they had reconciled for two years before finally separating in 2022. The husband and wife both contended that they should be entitled to about...