Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal, Holds Investigating Officer Cannot Create Evidence  ||  Supreme Court: NDPS Prosecution Cannot Be Quashed Solely Over Co-Accused’s Disclosure  ||  SC: Tax Classification Depends on Goods' Form at Sale, not their End Use  ||  Delhi High Court: No Material Showing Delhi Police Compromised the 2020 Riots Probe  ||  Madras HC Suggests Mandatory Attachment of Properties Suspected to Be Proceeds of Corruption  ||  P&H High Court: Demolition After Lawyer Flagged Corruption Appears Aimed at Silencing Him  ||  Calcutta High Court: Contempt Proceedings Cannot Be Used to Challenge Orders or Attack Judges  ||  Orissa High Court: Marriage Need Not Be Preserved When the Relationship Has Substantially Eroded  ||  SC: CIRP Can Continue Despite Fraudulent Insolvency Plea That Triggered It  ||  Delhi HC: Senior Citizen May Seek Eviction of Daughter-in-Law for Ill-Treatment    

Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau - (03 Aug 2016)

Victim’s entitlement to compensation measured by reference to the law of state of accident, routes to recovery provided by Directives he or she invokes

Motor Vehicles

In present case, Respondent, a United Kingdom resident, was on holiday in Greece. Walking along the verge of a road, she was struck from behind by a vehicle registered in Greece. Driver had neither a valid driving licence nor it appears any insurance and is admitted to have been responsible for the accident. Respondent suffered very serious injuries, which included loss of her right leg requiring her to use a wheelchair, continuing pain and psychological reaction, as well as loss of earnings.

Directives were and are a scheme of which the constant aim has been to improve the prospects and ease with which injured parties can recover the compensation to which they are “entitled” in respect of any loss or damage caused by vehicles. Clauses 7.2 and 8.2 of the Agreement provided that the compensation body in the victim’s country of residence was to “apply, in evaluating liability and assessing compensation, the law of the country in which the accident occurred”.

Directives is clear, and proceed on basis that a victim’s entitlement to compensation will be measured on a consistent basis, by reference to the law of State of the accident, whichever of routes to recovery provided by the Directives he or she invokes. In consequence, it also makes no difference to measure of liability of body or person ultimately responsible, which route is chosen.

Regulation 12(4)(b) is more specific and less easy to fit within the scheme of the Directives. Loss and damage recoverable from the UK MIB in its role as compensation body is said to be that “properly recoverable in consequence of that accident by the injured party from [the insured] person under the laws applying in that part of the United Kingdom in which the injured party resided at the date of the accident”. Supreme Court overruled the decisions in Jacobs v Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Bloy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau and allowed UK MIB’s present appeal while unanimously holding that, scope of the UK MIB’s liability to Ms Moreno is to be determined in accordance with the law of Greece.

Tags : COMPENSATION   LIABILITY   JURISDICTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved