Moore v Secretary of State for Transport Motor Insurers Bureau [2007] EWHC 879 (QB) (20 April 2007)
The claim for Francovich damages is statute barred because the cause of action accrued at the date of the accident (19 April 1995), when the claimant first suffered loss due to the alleged failure to transpose the Directive. There was no continuing cause of action accruing up to the date of the arbitrator's award....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] EWHC 879
- Parties
- Claimant: Kenneth Dudley Moore; First Defendant: The Secretary of State for Transport; Second Defendant: Motor Insurers Bureau
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 20 April 2007
- Procedural Posture
- High Court Civil Claim (queen's Bench Division) / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim struck out as statute barred
- Legal Topics
- Francovich Damages, Limitation Period, Implementation of EU Directives, Motor Insurance Directive, Procedural Fairness, Arbitration, Compensation for Untraced Drivers
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kenneth Dudley Moore
Claimant
The Secretary of State for Transport
First Defendant
Motor Insurers Bureau
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Claim (queen's Bench Division) / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claim for Francovich damages is statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980
- 2 Whether the United Kingdom failed to properly implement Council Directive 84/5/EEC (Second Motor Insurance Directive)
- 3 Whether the procedural arrangements under the 1972 Untraced Drivers Agreement provided adequate protection and procedural guarantees to victims
Ratio Decidendi
The claim for Francovich damages is statute barred because the cause of action accrued at the date of the accident (19 April 1995), when the claimant first suffered loss due to the alleged failure to transpose the Directive. There was no continuing cause of action accruing up to the date of the arbitrator's award. The procedural arrangements under the 1972 Agreement, as interpreted by the ECJ in Evans, were sufficient to implement the Directive, and any alleged unfairness in the handling of evidence was not causally linked to a failure to transpose the Directive.
Court Disposition
Claim struck out as statute barred
Orders
- Claim dismissed as statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980
- No need to determine summary judgment application on damages claim
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment