Quantcast
Channel: Road Traffic Archives - swarb.co.uk
Viewing all 3900 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Vincent v Musterphantom Limited: CA 10 Dec 1996

March 24, 2019, 9:13 am
↧
Search

Robson v S Marriott Guardian Insurance Limited: CA 11 Dec 1996

March 24, 2019, 9:14 am
↧
↧

Peter Cuthbert v Geeta Bannister: CA 18 May 1998

March 25, 2019, 10:31 am
↧

Elizabeth Ann Hearne v Susan Julie Hatchett KM: CA 8 Jun 1998

March 25, 2019, 10:34 am
↧

Katherine Bouch v Mary Katherine Bouch, John Hewitt, Motor Insurers Bureaux, Bradford Pennine Insurance: CA 19 Jun 1998

March 25, 2019, 10:39 am
↧
↧

McDonald v Arcade Traffic Management: CA 30 Jul 1998

March 25, 2019, 1:21 pm
↧

Mighell v Reading and Another and Evans v Motor Insurers Bureau and White v White and Another: CA 30 Sep 1998

March 25, 2019, 1:28 pm
$
0
0

References: Times 12-Oct-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1465, [1999] 1 LLR 30
Links: Bailii
Coram: Hobhouse LJ
Ratio: Passengers were injured in motor vehicles. The drivers were uninsured, and the MIB had declined to make payment. The doctrine of direct effect did not apply where the allegation was that the Motor Insurers Bureau arrangement did not comply with a European Directive. It was not clear whether the Bureau was an emanation of state, but government had had a choice of institutions through which to implement the Directive. As to the nature of the MIB: ‘Its members are private law insurance companies who have chosen for the time being to write motor insurance business. It is true that they have a statutory position in that it is compulsory for the user of a motor vehicle on the road to take out a policy with a company which is a member of the Bureau. (Section 145 of the Road Traffic Act, 1988). But the Motor Insurers’ Bureau scheme has been in existence from a time earlier than the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Communities (or Union) and agreements between the Bureau and the Secretary of State relating to uninsured drivers and untraced drivers have long formed part of that scheme.’
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 25 March 2019
Ref: 144944

The post Mighell v Reading and Another and Evans v Motor Insurers Bureau and White v White and Another: CA 30 Sep 1998 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧

Lesley Hird v Milner (Trading As Versatile Ceramics): CA 5 Oct 1998

March 25, 2019, 1:40 pm
↧
Search

Denis v Hamer Ford Limited: CA 14 Oct 1998

March 25, 2019, 1:43 pm
↧
↧

Asher, Carmichael v Thompson and Motor Insurers’ Bureau: CA 27 Oct 1998

March 25, 2019, 1:47 pm
↧

Andrew Paul Stevenson v Edmund Barry Rodbourne: CA 5 Nov 1998

March 25, 2019, 2:15 pm
↧

Hossain v Thompson: CA 6 Nov 1998

March 25, 2019, 2:16 pm
↧

Kemsley v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Feb 2004

April 9, 2019, 2:40 am
$
0
0

References: [2004] EWHC 278 (Admin)
Links: Bailii
Ratio: The defendant appealed a conviction for driving with excess alcohol. She said she had not first been cautioned when interviewed after an accident and that her admission that she had been driving should not have been allowed in evidence.
Held: That admission had properly been admitted. An expert for the defence had said that the intoximeter device had been modified in answer to criticisms of its inability to differentiate the presence of mouth alcohol. The device was not the same as that which has been approved, the results of its use cannot be admissible even where it was substantially like an approved device, and even if its performance is the same as that of an approved device. Since it had been modified, it was no longer an approved device. However if the judge had accepted that it was not an approved device, the reading could not have been admitted.
Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Breckon v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn (Bailii, [2007] EWHC 2013 (Admin), [2005] RTR 8)
    The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol.
    Held: There was no requirement that the prosecutor should produce the results of the roadside breath test in evidence, and the breathalyser was of the approved . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 09 April 2019
Ref: 197971

The post Kemsley v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Feb 2004 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧
↧

John Mann International Ltd v Vehicle Inspectorate: Admn 28 May 2004

April 9, 2019, 2:42 am
↧

Philip Owen Lloyd-Wolper v Robert Moore; National Insurance Guarantee Corporation Plc, Charles Moore: CA 22 Jun 2004

April 9, 2019, 2:43 am
$
0
0

lloydwolper_mooreCA2004
References: [2004] EWCA Civ 766, Times 06-Aug-2004, [2004] 3 All ER 741, [2004] 1 WLR 2350
Links: Bailii
Coram: Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Rix
Ratio: The first defendant drove a car belonging to his father and insured by his father. The father consented to the driving but under a mistaken belief that his son was licensed. The claimant was injured by the defendant in a road traffic accident.
Held: For insurance purposes, the father could validly permit the driving when under a mistake. A permission which would arise only subject to and upon the fulfillment of a condition was not a permission until that condition was fulfilled, but a permission given did not cease to be one only such for mistake. There was no relevance in different kinds of mistake.
Pill LJ said: ‘permission does not cease to be permission for the purposes of the statute because, in good faith, the person giving it believes that the person to whom it is given is covered by the policy when in fact the person is not.’
Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 151
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • Cited – Newbury v Davis QBD ([1974] RTR 367)
    The owner of a vehicle agreed to lend it to someone else on condition that that person insured against third party risks. In the owner’s absence, that person drove the car on a road without insurance.
    Held: The appeal against conviction was . .
  • Cited – Ferrymasters Ltd v Adams ([1980] RTR 139)
    Employers were alleged to have caused or permitted an employee to drive a vehicle on the road while not holding a driving licence authorising him to do so. When the employee had entered the employment, the employers had ensured that he held a valid . .
  • Cited – Baugh v Crago QBD ([1975] RTR 453)
    The defendant believed that a driver was the holder of a driving licence and permitted him to use the vehicle, when the driver was not in fact such a holder. The prosecutor appealed his acquittal.
    Held: Considering Newbury v Davis. The . .
  • Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Fisher QBD ([1992] RTR 93)
    F was asked to lend L a car. F knew L was disqualified, but agreed provided L found an insured driver with a full valid driving licence. F did not know who L would ask or that he in fact asked R to drive; R was employed as delivery driver and the . .
  • Cited – Monk v Warbey CA ([1935] 1 KB 75)
    The court took a strict view of a vehicle owner’s potential liability to injured third parties.
    Held: A person who suffered injury by reason of a breach of s35 could maintain an action in damages for that breach: ‘The Road Traffic Act, 1930, . .
  • Cited – Lyons v May ([1948] 2 All ER 1062)
    A person who was ignorant of the fact that there was no policy of insurance covering a vehicle may be guilty of an offence if he permits the use of the vehicles while uninsured. . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Churchill Insurance Company Ltd v Wilkinson and Others CA ([2010] Lloyds Rep IR 591, Bailii, [2010] EWCA Civ 556)
    The various insured defendants had been driven in the insured vehicles by a non-insured driver. Suffering injury at the negligence of the driver, they recovered variously damages. Their insurance companies sought recovery of the sums paid from their . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Leading Case
Last Update: 09 April 2019
Ref: 198301

The post Philip Owen Lloyd-Wolper v Robert Moore; National Insurance Guarantee Corporation Plc, Charles Moore: CA 22 Jun 2004 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧
Search

Richards and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Pembrokeshire County Council: CA 8 Jun 2004

April 9, 2019, 2:46 am
$
0
0

References: [2004] EWCA Civ 813
Links: Bailii
Ratio: Unlawfulness of parking regulations
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 09 April 2019
Ref: 198511

The post Richards and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Pembrokeshire County Council: CA 8 Jun 2004 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧

Fiona Thompson v Hampshire County Council: CA 27 Jul 2004

April 9, 2019, 10:34 pm
$
0
0

References: [2004] EWCA Civ 1016, Times 14-Oct-2004
Links: Bailii
Coram: Potter, Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Carnwath
Ratio: The claimant fell into a ditch by a path on the highway in the dark. She appealed a finding of no liability on the highway authority.
Held: The authority’s responsibility was as to the surface structures of the road way and not as to the layout.
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • Cited – Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council HL (HL, [2004] UKHL 15, Bailii, Times 02-Apr-04, [2004] 1 WLR 1057, [2004] RTR 27, [2004] 2 All ER 326)
    The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down.
    Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include . .
  • Cited – Goodes v East Sussex County Council HL (Times 16-Jun-00, House of Lords, Gazette 29-Jun-00, House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 34, [2000] 3 All ER 603, [2000] 1 WLR 1356)
    The claimant was driving along a road. He skidded on ice, crashed and was severely injured. He claimed damages saying that the Highway authority had failed to ‘maintain’ the road.
    Held: The statutory duty on a highway authority to keep a road . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 10 April 2019
Ref: 199571

The post Fiona Thompson v Hampshire County Council: CA 27 Jul 2004 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧
↧

Wilson v Donaldson: CA 9 Jul 2004

April 9, 2019, 10:34 pm
$
0
0

References: [2004] EWCA Civ 972
Links: Bailii
Coram: Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Rix Mr Justice Munby
Ratio: Cattle strayed from a field onto the road. A motorist was injured and claimed damages. The farmer appealed.
Held: the judge had been correct that the farmers should have recognised the risk, and taken simple and inexpensive steps to avoid the risk. The ancient common law immunity for animals was abolished in 1971. ‘. . the defendant is in business as a farmer, having therefore to exercise his mind about the risks inherent in his business and the means of protecting against such risks, whether such protection is to himself, the set-up of his farm or to third parties.’ Appeal dismissed.
Statutes: Animals Act 1971
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • Leave to Appeal – Donaldson v Wilson CA (Bailii, [2004] EWCA Civ 123)
    The owner of cattle sought leave to appeal a finding of negligence in his having failed to maintain the fences on his property, which in turn allowed his cattle to stray into the road and cause an accident in which the claimant was severely injured. . .
  • Cited – Searle v Wallbank HL ([1947] AC 341, [1947] 1 All ER 12, (1947) 176 LT 104, (1947) 63 TLR 24, [1947] LJR 258)
    There existed an ancient common law immunity in respect of animals straying onto a public highway. An owner or occupier of land adjacent to a highway has no legal obligation at common law to highway users so to keep and maintain his hedges, fences . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Full Appeal – Donaldson v Wilson CA (Bailii, [2004] EWCA Civ 123)
    The owner of cattle sought leave to appeal a finding of negligence in his having failed to maintain the fences on his property, which in turn allowed his cattle to stray into the road and cause an accident in which the claimant was severely injured. . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 10 April 2019
Ref: 199635

The post Wilson v Donaldson: CA 9 Jul 2004 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧

EUI Ltd v Bristol Alliance Ltd Partnership: CA 11 Oct 2011

April 11, 2019, 2:34 am
$
0
0

References: [2012] EWCA Civ 1267, [2013] QB 806, [2012] WLR(D) 273, [2013] RTR 9, [2013] Lloyd’s Rep IR 351, [2013] 1 All ER (Comm) 257, [2013] 1 QB 806, [2013] 2 WLR 1029
Links: Bailii, WLRD
Coram: Ward, McFarlane LJJ, Dame Janet Smith
Ratio: A driver had deliberately driven at a building owned by the respondent company causing substantial damage. The driver’s insurer now appealed against a decision that it was liable to the respondent despite a clause excluding liability for deliberate acts of a driver.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and nor did a claim lie against the Motor Insurer’s Bureau.
Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 151u
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 11 April 2019
Ref: 464841

The post EUI Ltd v Bristol Alliance Ltd Partnership: CA 11 Oct 2011 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧

Regina (on the Application of P Richards and G Richards) v Pembrokeshire County Council: CA 29 Jul 2004

April 11, 2019, 2:46 am
$
0
0

References: [2004] EWCA Civ 1000
Links: Bailii
Coram: Lord Justice Sedley P, Lord Justice Neuberger
Ratio: Challenge to parking regulations.
Held: The appeal succeeded. In assessing the decision it was open to the court to consider and elucidate the reasoning behind the option of the parking scheme. Assuming that the 1975 Order was valid, the reasons for adopting the Directions were not reasons significantly concerned with the operation or management of the harbour, and insofar as the Directions affected Castle Terrace directly, no, or at any rate no proper, consideration was given to the fact that the adoption of the Directions might invade a property right of the appellants without adequate justification and without compensation.
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 11 April 2019
Ref: 199735

The post Regina (on the Application of P Richards and G Richards) v Pembrokeshire County Council: CA 29 Jul 2004 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.

↧
Viewing all 3900 articles
Browse latest View live
Search