Spedition Welter GmbH v Avanssur SA Case C-306/12
- The claims representative’s authority is restricted to accepting service of court documents. Article 21.6 of the Sixth Motor Insurance Directive expressly states that its presence in the claimant’s home jurisdiction does not signify that the insurer is domiciled there.
- If a settlement cannot be negotiated through the claims representative it may still be necessary to deal with the foreign insurers legal representative abroad, even if that may seem somewhat counter intuitive from an administrative viewpoint.
- In the UK the 2002 Regulations confine the direct right to (i) accidents, (ii) occurring in the United Kingdom and (iii) where the claimant has a cause of action against an insured person and (iv) only to the extent that the insurer is ‘liable to the insured person’.
- The 2002 Regulations are currently under investigation by the European Commission as they appear to breach the wider scope required under the Directives.
- For accidents that post date 11 January 2009, Rome II governs both the substantive law and procedural rules that are applicable to the accident – this will usually be the law of the place where the accident took occurred.
- If liability is contested then there may be only a modest practical benefit to be gained from issuing proceedings in the home court and the defendant may also argue for a different jurisdiction.