Evans v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions Motor Insurers' Bureau [2001] EWCA Civ 32 (18 January 2001)

Evans v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions Motor Insurers' Bureau [2001] EWCA Civ 32 (18 January 2001)

The judge's decision to refer the questions to the European Court of Justice was within his discretion, as the questions were necessary for the determination of the action and not merely hypothetical. The appeal was dismissed because the reference was appropriate given the unresolved issues of law and fact, and summary judgment was not warranted at this stage.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 32
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Samuel Evans; Appellant/defendant: Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions; Respondent/defendant: Motor Insurers' Bureau
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Implementation of EU Directives, State Liability, Motor Insurance, Procedural Fairness, Costs and Interest in Arbitration
European Union Law Insurance Law Civil Procedure Implementation of EU Directives State Liability Motor Insurance Procedural Fairness Costs and Interest in Arbitration

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Evans

Respondent/claimant

Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Appellant/defendant

Motor Insurers' Bureau

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in referring two questions to the European Court of Justice under Article 234 EC Treaty
  2. 2 Whether the questions referred were hypothetical or academic
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted against the claimant on part of his claim

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's decision to refer the questions to the European Court of Justice was within his discretion, as the questions were necessary for the determination of the action and not merely hypothetical. The appeal was dismissed because the reference was appropriate given the unresolved issues of law and fact, and summary judgment was not warranted at this stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The reference to the European Court of Justice stands.