A Stark Reminder to Insurers About the RTA Protocol: London Borough of Islington v Bourous [2022] EWCA Civ 1242 - Sebastian Bates, Temple Garden Chambers
19/10/22. The Court of Appeal has recently given an extensive account of the appropriate functioning of the Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents (‘the RTA Protocol’).
Summary
The Court’s judgment addressed two appeals brought by defendants who had unsuccessfully contended in the County Court that taxi drivers who had made claims under the RTA Protocol ought not to have recovered car hire charges in light of Hussain v EUI Limited [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB); [2020] RTR 7.
After recounting the applicable provisions of the RTA Protocol, the authorities on the RTA Protocol and car hire charges, and the factual and procedural history as well as the grounds of appeal and submissions in each of the appeals, Elisabeth Laing LJ proceeded to give what she acknowledged at [142] were ‘brief’ reasons for the Court’s decision to dismiss both appeals.
These reasons were directed at the question of how an issue arises for determination at a Stage 3 hearing. Their essence was a thoroughgoing rejection (at [146]) of the proposition that ‘a claim under the RTA Protocol must be pleaded and proved in the same way as a claim to which the RTA Protocol does not apply, and, further, that, if, as late as the Stage 3 hearing, the...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/Eulenblau
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
