This morning, the Home Office published its analysis of the responses to last year’s consultation about the introduction of a new legislative duty – the Protect duty – to assess and take steps to mitigate the risk of terrorist attacks. The duty would apply to organisations of a certain size and to operators of venue/places to which the public has access. The duty will apply to the private and public sector alike and relevant legislation should be expected in a matter of months.Continue reading
This first blog of the New Year reports further progress this afternoon in the Commons for Peter Bone MP’s presentation Bill seeking to remove the effects of the Vnuk v Zararovalnica and Lewis v Tindale decisions from English motor insurance law.
The brief debate at today’s Committee Stage ran to around only 30 minutes, following which it was approved without objection or amendment. The points made in today’s debate were, in broad terms, summaries of those aired during a debate in September in Westminster Hall on the effects of these two cases (the transcript of the Westminster Hall debate can be read in full here)
The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Bill now passes to Report Stage before the whole House. We expect that is also likely to be a fairly short discussion and it could take place in the next few weeks.
In closing today, Mr Bone pointed out that his Bill, if it succeeds – which looks increasingly likely – would be the first piece of primary legislation, after the UK’s exit from the EU, to alter an aspect of ‘retained EU law’.
Stakeholders in the motor insurance and motor sports sectors will really not be too interested in whether it is the first, second or third to do that but will simply want to see it take effect ASAP. As the Bill is drafted to commence two months after its Royal Assent, there might be a fair prospect of it taking effect late in the second quarter of this year. In the meantime, please feel free to get in touch if you’d like to discuss the detail of the proposed changes.
Written by Alistair Kinley, Director of Policy and Government Affairs at BLM (email@example.com)
Keeping her promise to deliver a determination before Christmas, HHJ Karen Walden-Smith handed down judgment yesterday in Frederik Tylicki v Graham Gibbons and in line with other recent High Court decisions, it comes promptly after closing submissions on 3 December. A copy of the judgment can be accessed here.
The claim arose from an incident during a flat race in October 2016 at Kempton in which the claimant’s and defendant’s horses collided, causing the claimant to fall and be rendered paraplegic from the injuries he suffered.
Much press was generated during the trial itself. That is nothing new, particularly in high profile sports claims. Here, the life changing injuries suffered by the claimant grabbed the headlines and not simply for the potential compensation award but because he remains not just connected to the sport, but through his punditry, in its limelight. The negative spin in the story came from the suggestion that a finding for the claimant would lead to the potential ruin of the sport.
Spoiler alert; the claimant succeeded. Addendum spoiler alert; horseracing will survive.Continue reading