Farah v Abdullahi & Ors

Farah v Abdullahi & Ors

The claimant is entitled to proceed against the unnamed third defendant because the proceedings are capable of conferring a real benefit, either through a challenge to the policy avoidance or via the MIB Uninsured Drivers Agreement/Article 75. The right to proceed does not depend on incontrovertible section 151 liability. Permission to issue was not required, and alternative service on the insurer was justified. Innocent non-disclosure did not warrant setting aside the order.

Parties
Claimant: Idris Farah (by his Litigation Friend Fatuma Mohamad); First Defendant: Ahmed Abdullahi; Second Defendant: Probus Insurance Company Europe DAC; Third Defendant: The person unknown driving vehicle registration number V168DLU who collided with the claimant on 6 September 2014; Fourth Defendant: EUI Limited; Fifth Defendant: Motor Insurers’ Bureau
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Order Permitting Service on Unnamed Defendant
Outcome
Application to set aside order dismissed
Legal Topics
Service of Process on Unnamed Defendants, Motor Insurance Liability, Alternative Service, Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Personal Injury Service of Process on Unnamed Defendants Motor Insurance Liability Alternative Service Non Disclosure in Ex Parte 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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Idris Farah (by his Litigation Friend Fatuma Mohamad)

Claimant

Ahmed Abdullahi

First Defendant

Probus Insurance Company Europe DAC

Second Defendant

The person unknown driving vehicle registration number V168DLU who collided with the claimant on 6 September 2014

Third Defendant

EUI Limited

Fourth Defendant

Motor Insurers’ Bureau

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Order Permitting Service on Unnamed Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim can proceed against an unnamed defendant where the insurer has avoided the policy ab initio
  2. 2 Whether permission is required to issue proceedings against an unnamed defendant
  3. 3 Whether service on the insurer as alternative service on an unnamed defendant is valid

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is entitled to proceed against the unnamed third defendant because the proceedings are capable of conferring a real benefit, either through a challenge to the policy avoidance or via the MIB Uninsured Drivers Agreement/Article 75. The right to proceed does not depend on incontrovertible section 151 liability. Permission to issue was not required, and alternative service on the insurer was justified. Innocent non-disclosure did not warrant setting aside the order.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside order dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant permitted to proceed against the unnamed third defendant
  • Alternative service on the fourth defendant (insurer) stands