Colley v Motor Insurers' Bureau [2022] EWCA Civ 360 (22 March 2022)

Colley v Motor Insurers' Bureau [2022] EWCA Civ 360 (22 March 2022)

The Motor Insurers' Bureau, as the compensation body and emanation of the state, is obliged under Article 10 of Directive 2009/103/EC to compensate victims where the Article 3 insurance obligation has not been satisfied due to national law allowing avoidance of insurance policies incompatible with EU law. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 360
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Daniel James Colley; Third Defendant/appellant: Motor Insurers' Bureau
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Motor Insurance, Direct Effect of EU Directives, Compensation Bodies, Avoidance of Insurance Policies, Third Party Rights
Insurance Law European Union Law Personal Injury Motor Insurance Direct Effect of EU Directives Compensation Bodies Avoidance of Insurance Policies Third Party Rights

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel James Colley

Claimant/respondent

Motor Insurers' Bureau

Third Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope of Motor Insurers' Bureau's obligation under Directive 2009/103/EC
  2. 2 Whether MIB must compensate when insurance policy is avoided ab initio
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'covered by insurance' under Article 3(1)

Ratio Decidendi

The Motor Insurers' Bureau, as the compensation body and emanation of the state, is obliged under Article 10 of Directive 2009/103/EC to compensate victims where the Article 3 insurance obligation has not been satisfied due to national law allowing avoidance of insurance policies incompatible with EU law. The obligation is coextensive with the Member State's Article 3 duty, and the MIB must make good the shortfall caused by such breaches, except where the joyrider exclusion applies.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • Motor Insurers' Bureau is liable to compensate Mr Colley for personal injuries sustained.
  • MIB must pay compensation up to the limits of the Article 3 insurance obligation.