Mangal Singh, R (on the application of) v Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council

The obligation to compensate innocent victims under European motor-insurance directives does not remove domestic criminal liability for using a vehicle without the insurance required by the Road Traffic Act 1988. Sections 148 and 151 make specified policy exclusions ineffective against third-party claims, but they do not generally prevent criminal liability.

A breach of a prohibited exclusion does not establish the offence under section 143. A breach of another, non-prohibited policy condition may mean that the vehicle is being used without the required insurance. The directives concern victim compensation and free movement, not the driver’s criminal responsibility. The appeal was dismissed.

The claimant was convicted by the Solihull Magistrates’ Court of plying for hire contrary to section 45 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 and driving without insurance contrary to section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

He accepted that domestic legislation provided no defence. He relied on Ruiz Bernaldez [1996] All ER (EC) 741 and three European motor-insurance directives, arguing that the insurer would remain liable to compensate innocent victims despite the policy exclusion. The central issue was whether that European law prevented conviction under section 143.

1. The appeal was dismissed. The District Judge had been correct to convict the claimant of driving without insurance.
2. The European directives were directed to ensuring compensation for victims of road-traffic accidents and facilitating free movement. They did not determine the criminal responsibility of a driver who failed to comply with domestic compulsory-insurance requirements.
3. Ruiz Bernaldez [1996] All ER (EC) 741 concerned the insurer’s liability to compensate third parties, with a possible right of recovery against the insured. It did not decide whether a driver had committed a domestic insurance offence. Its wider interpretation was therefore not applicable to the criminal issue.
4. The domestic scheme was compatible with the directives. Sections 145, 148 and 151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 made specified exclusions ineffective in relation to liabilities required to be covered. Compensation could therefore be secured through the insurer or the Motor Insurers’ Bureau without eliminating criminal liability.
5. A prohibited condition under section 148 or section 151 cannot, by its breach alone, mean that the vehicle was uninsured for section 143 purposes. The policy remains compliant with the statutory requirements. By contrast, breach of a non-prohibited condition may mean that no policy satisfying section 143 is in force.
6. The reasoning in Telford and Wrekin v Tanveer Ahmed and others [2006] EWHC 1748 (Admin) was followed. The alternative argument that the directives lacked direct effect also failed, since their limits were not exactly defined and member states retained discretion, applying Van Duyn v Home Office [1975] All ER 190.
7. The respondent was awarded its costs, subject to detailed assessment and the usual restriction on enforcement without permission.

1. Solihull Magistrates’ Court: convicted the claimant of plying for hire and driving without insurance.
2. High Court (Administrative Court): on a case stated appeal, affirmed the conviction for driving without insurance and dismissed the appeal.