‘Knowledge’ of Uninsurance

White v White and Another (H of L TLR 6 March and NLJ of 9 March)

Brian White was being driven to a late-night party by his brother Shane, when the car crashed because of Shane’s faulty driving. This crash resulted in very serious injuries to Brian. Neither Shane nor the car had been insured as he had not passed the driving test and, moreover, was disqualified from driving. Brian’s claim for damages was substantial and, as there was no question of Shane being able to meet his claim, Brian was looking to the Motor Insurers Bureau for compensation. Under clause 6(1)(e)(ii) of the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (Compensation of Victims of Uninsured Drivers) Agreement 1988, the MIB were not under obligation to a person injured who ‘knew or ought to have known’ that the vehicle was uninsured. When interpreting any document it was always important to identify, if possible, the purpose the provision was intended to achieve. The purpose of the MIB agreement had been to give effect to the terms of the EEC Motor Insurance Directive Article 1(4) which stated that ‘… Member states may exclude the payment of compensation … in respect of persons who voluntarily entered the vehicle … when the body can prove that they knew it was uninsured’.