In the recent Liverpool County Court decision of Nagorski v Nikolics and Tradewise Insurance, the court had to determine RTA liability where the first defendant was uninsured, but the vehicle he was driving was shown on MID as being insured on a Motor Trader policy.
The insurer is on MID, so they must be the RTA insurer, right?
In the recent Liverpool County Court decision of Nagorski v Nikolics and Tradewise Insurance, the court had to determine RTA liability where the first defendant was uninsured, but the vehicle he was driving was shown on MID as being insured on a Motor Trader policy.
The scenario presented by this case is far from being a one-off and further highlights the need for a solution.
(Updated July 2021)
You may also like
Hot off the press from the CJC’s “sweatbox”
140 people converged on a poorly air-conditioned room (affectionately referred to as a “sweatbox” by one leading High Court Judge),...
CJC publishes consultation on key aspects of the Jackson reforms
Hot on the heels of the recent consultation on QOCS and vulnerable parties the CJC has published its own consultation...
Landlords be aware – 10% uplift in damages can apply to breach of repairing covenant
The Court of Appeal has held that the 10% uplift in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act...
OPSS report: Characteristics of modern domestic fires and the implications for product performance testing
The Office for Product Safety & Standards (OPSS) had a busy month in May, having published reports on both artificial...
