Nemeti and others v Sabre Insurance Co. Ltd EWCA Civ 1555
- Did the court have the power to substitute a new party after the limitation period had expired (which was addressed by the court)
- Did a proper interpretation of the combined effect of articles 3, 13 and 18 of the Sixth Motor Insurance Directive, as interpreted by the Court of Justice, extend the direct right to embrace to a claim against an unauthorised driver of an otherwise insured vehicle where the accident occurred abroad but within another EEA member state? If so, did the UK national law provision fully transpose that Community law? If not, were the claimants entitled to damages against the Secretary of State under the Francovich principles? (These issues were not considered because the claimants proposed amendment sought to abandon the regulation 3 claim)
- (Obiter) that the statutory right of action conferred by regulation 3 did not apply as (i) the tortfeasor was deemed to be uninsured and (ii) the accident occurred outside the UK. So this was doomed to fail from the outset because these preconditions were not met.
- That the statutory conditions precedent imposed for the relief conferred by CPR 19.1 and section 35 combined were not met: