AVIVA INSURANCE LTD AGAINST ALISTAIR McCOIST AND ANOTHER [2023] ScotCS CSOH_62 (05 September 2023)

AVIVA INSURANCE LTD AGAINST ALISTAIR McCOIST AND ANOTHER [2023] ScotCS CSOH_62 (05 September 2023)

The court found that Mr McCoist expressly and repeatedly prohibited Argyll from driving the car after learning he was uninsured, and took steps to remove access. There was no evidence that this prohibition was withdrawn or that circumstances justified inferring permission. The statutory test for 'permitting' was not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] ScotCS CSOH_62
Parties
Pursuer: Aviva Insurance Limited; First Defender: Alistair McCoist; Second Defender: Argyll McCoist
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Recovery Action (insurance Recoupment) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Decree granted against the second defender (Argyll McCoist); first defender (Alistair McCoist) assoilzied (absolved).
Legal Topics
Insurer's Right of Recovery, Permitting Use of Uninsured Vehicle, Section 151(8) Road Traffic Act 1988, Interpretation of 'permitting' Under Insurance Statutes
Insurance Law Road Traffic Law Civil Liability Insurer's Right of Recovery Permitting Use of Uninsured Vehicle Section 151(8) Road Traffic Act 1988 Interpretation of 'permitting' Under Insurance Statutes

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aviva Insurance Limited

Pursuer

Alistair McCoist

First Defender

Argyll McCoist

Second Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Recovery Action (insurance Recoupment) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defender (Mr McCoist) 'caused or permitted' the use of the vehicle by the second defender (Argyll McCoist) within the meaning of section 151(8)(b) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, thereby rendering him liable to indemnify the insurer for sums paid to a third party.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mr McCoist expressly and repeatedly prohibited Argyll from driving the car after learning he was uninsured, and took steps to remove access. There was no evidence that this prohibition was withdrawn or that circumstances justified inferring permission. The statutory test for 'permitting' was not met; thus, Mr McCoist was not liable under section 151(8).

Court Disposition

Decree granted against the second defender (Argyll McCoist); first defender (Alistair McCoist) assoilzied (absolved).

Orders

  • Decree for payment of £244,000 with interest at 8% from date of citation against the second defender.
  • First defender assoilzied from the conclusions of the summons.