Weldrick v Essex and Suffolk Equitable Insurance Society Ltd: QBD 1950

Nine months before the writ was issued to make a claim against the insured under a motor policy, the plaintiff’s solicitors had written to the insurers: ‘We understand your Society has repudiated liability, and we shall be grateful to have your confirmation thereof in writing, because you will appreciate, we shall have to take proceedings against Mohamed, and as against the owner of the other vehicle, and at the same time give notice to the Motor Insurers Bureau of your repudiation of liability.’ The insureres confirmed that they would repudiate liability.
Held: ‘It is very difficult to resist the view that the defendants in those circumstances knew that proceedings would almost inevitably be brought, but I am afraid I cannot quite decide it like that.’ The solicitor’s letter was insufficient notice for the purposes of section 10(2): ‘What they (the insurers) did have was an intimation that in certain circumstances proceedings might be brought, but not necessarily that they would be brought.’


Birkett J


[1950] 83 Ll R 91


Road Traffic Act 1934 10(2)


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWylie on Behalf of SMP Motor Policies at Lloyds v Wake CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimant sought to recover damages following a road accident. The driver’s insurance was defective. The driver claimed under section 151, but proceedings were issued without formal notice of the issue of proceedings having been given to MIB. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Road Traffic

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.179831