Sarfraz v Akhtar & Anor

Sarfraz v Akhtar & Anor

It is properly arguable that the insurer's liability is not excluded under s.151(4) because the vehicle was not unlawfully taken until it was driven away, and the claimant did not allow himself to be carried in the car within the meaning of the statute, having entered solely to prevent its taking and having no reasonable opportunity to alight.

Parties
Claimant: Sharaz Sarfraz (a protected party suing by his brother and litigation friend Mohammed Sharbarz Sarfraz); First Defendant: Shakeeb Akhtar; Second Defendant: ERS Syndicate Management Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (personal Injury, Insurance) / Application to Strike Out Claim or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Motor Insurance Liability, Road Traffic Act 1988 S.151, Excluded Liability, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Insurance Law Personal Injury Civil Procedure Motor Insurance Liability Road Traffic Act 1988 S.151 Excluded Liability Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharaz Sarfraz (a protected party suing by his brother and litigation friend Mohammed Sharbarz Sarfraz)

Claimant

Shakeeb Akhtar

First Defendant

ERS Syndicate Management Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (personal Injury, Insurance) / Application to Strike Out Claim or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the insurer's liability under s.151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is excluded by s.151(4) in circumstances where the claimant was a passenger in a vehicle taken without authority.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant 'allowed' himself to be carried in the vehicle within the meaning of s.151(4).
  3. 3 At what point is a vehicle considered 'unlawfully taken' for the purposes of s.151(4).

Ratio Decidendi

It is properly arguable that the insurer's liability is not excluded under s.151(4) because the vehicle was not unlawfully taken until it was driven away, and the claimant did not allow himself to be carried in the car within the meaning of the statute, having entered solely to prevent its taking and having no reasonable opportunity to alight.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The insurer's application to strike out the claim or for summary judgment is dismissed.