ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Queen’s Bench Division – United Kingdom. Approximation of laws – Directive 84/5/EEC – Compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of motor vehicles – Damage or injury caused by unidentified or insufficiently insured vehicles – Protection of victims – Defective transposition of the directive – Liability of the Member State concerned.
The case concerned the United Kingdom’s implementation of a directive relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles. Implementation had been effected by means of a number of agreements between the Secretary of State and an existing body, the Motor Insurers’ Bureau. In considering the adequacy of such implementation, the ECJ stated: ‘As to whether it is sufficient, for the purposes of transposing the Second Directive, to rely on an existing body, it must be borne in mind that, whilst legislative action on the part of each Member State is not necessarily required in order to implement a directive, it is essential for national law to guarantee that the national authorities will effectively apply the directive in full, that the legal position under national law should be sufficiently precise and clear and that individuals are made fully aware of all their rights and, where appropriate, may rely on them before the national courts . . . In those circumstances, it must be held that a body may be regarded as authorised by a Member State within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the Second Directive where its obligation to provide compensation to victims of damage or injury caused by unidentified or insufficiently insured vehicles derives from an agreement concluded between that body and a public authority of the Member State, provided that the agreement is interpreted and applied as obliging the body to provide victims with the compensation guaranteed to them by the Second Directive and provided that victims may apply directly to that body’
The intention of the legislature in passing the Second Directive was ‘to entitle victims of damage or injury caused by unidentified or insufficiently insured vehicles to protection equivalent to, and as effective as, that available to persons injured by identified and insured vehicles’
Citations:
C-63/01, Times 09-Dec-2003, [2003] EUECJ C-63/01, [2004] RTR 32, [2005] All ER (EC) 763, [2003] ECR I-14447, [2004] Lloyd’s Rep IR 391, [2004] 1 CMLR 47, [2004] RTR 534
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
European
Cited by:
Cited – Regina (Amicus etc) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Admn 26-Apr-2004
The claimants sought a declaration that part of the Regulations were invalid, and an infringement of their human rights. The Regulations sought to exempt church schools from an obligation not to discriminate against homosexual teachers.
Held: . .
Cited – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau SC 3-Aug-2016
The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Insurance, Road Traffic
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.189877
