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 in 1995, when the claimant first suffered loss due to the alleged failure to transpose the Directive. The arbitration and compensation procedures in place at the time satisfied the requirements of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] EWHC 879 (QB)
- 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) / Judgment on Applications to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim struck out as statute barred; summary judgment granted for the defendants.
- Legal Topics
- Francovich Damages, Implementation of EU Directives, Limitation of Actions, Motor Insurance, Compensation for Victims of Untraced Drivers, Arbitration Procedure, Procedural Fairness
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) / Judgment on Applications to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claim for Francovich damages against the UK government is statute barred
- 2 Whether the UK failed to properly transpose the Second Motor Insurance Directive
- 3 Whether the arbitration procedure under the 1972 Untraced Drivers Agreement provided adequate procedural guarantees
Ratio Decidendi
The claim for Francovich damages is statute barred because the cause of action accrued at the date of the accident in 1995, when the claimant first suffered loss due to the alleged failure to transpose the Directive. The arbitration and compensation procedures in place at the time satisfied the requirements of the Second Motor Insurance Directive as interpreted by the ECJ, and any procedural failings were not attributable to a systemic failure by the State. There is no sufficient causal link between the alleged transposition failure and the quantum of compensation awarded.
Court Disposition
Claim struck out as statute barred; summary judgment granted for the defendants.
Orders
- Claim dismissed in its entirety as statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980.
- No need to consider summary judgment on damages claim as limitation is dispositive.
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