Bloy & Anor v Motor Insurers' Bureau [2013] EWCA Civ 1543 (29 November 2013)

Bloy & Anor v Motor Insurers' Bureau [2013] EWCA Civ 1543 (29 November 2013)

The compensation payable by the MIB to the claimants is to be assessed entirely by reference to English law, as Regulation 13(2)(b) of the 2003 Regulations deems the accident to have occurred in Great Britain for the purposes of compensation. The Lithuanian statutory cap does not apply, as it is a procedural matter governed by the law of the forum. The 2002 Agreement is a private arrangement and does not override UK legislation. The Motor Insurance Directives do not require the UK to limit compensation to the Lithuanian cap and expressly allow more generous compensation. No reference to the CJEU is necessary as the interpretation of UK legislation is clear and consistent with EU law.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 1543
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Georgina Bloy; Claimant/respondent: Charlie Ireson (a minor, suing by his mother and litigation friend, Georgina Bloy); Defendant/appellant: Motor Insurers' Bureau
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division, Manchester District Registry) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Cross Border Motor Insurance Compensation, Applicable Law for Assessment of Damages, Interpretation of EU Motor Insurance Directives, Procedural Vs Substantive Law in Conflict of Laws, Limits on Compensation Under Foreign Law
Insurance Law Private International Law European Union Law Tort Law Cross Border Motor Insurance Compensation Applicable Law for Assessment of Damages Interpretation of EU Motor Insurance Directives Procedural Vs Substantive Law in Conflict of Laws +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Georgina Bloy

Claimant/respondent

Charlie Ireson (a minor, suing by his mother and litigation friend, Georgina Bloy)

Claimant/respondent

Motor Insurers' Bureau

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division, Manchester District Registry) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether compensation payable by the Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB) to UK residents injured in a Lithuanian car accident is to be assessed under English law or subject to the Lithuanian statutory cap
  2. 2 Whether Regulation 13(2)(b) of the 2003 Regulations requires assessment of damages as if the accident occurred in Great Britain
  3. 3 Whether the Lithuanian cap on compensation is substantive or procedural for conflict of laws purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The compensation payable by the MIB to the claimants is to be assessed entirely by reference to English law, as Regulation 13(2)(b) of the 2003 Regulations deems the accident to have occurred in Great Britain for the purposes of compensation. The Lithuanian statutory cap does not apply, as it is a procedural matter governed by the law of the forum. The 2002 Agreement is a private arrangement and does not override UK legislation. The Motor Insurance Directives do not require the UK to limit compensation to the Lithuanian cap and expressly allow more generous compensation. No reference to the CJEU is necessary as the interpretation of UK legislation is clear and consistent with EU law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The defendant (MIB) is liable to pay compensation to the claimants assessed in accordance with English law, not limited by the Lithuanian statutory cap.
  • No reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union will be made.