0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Charlton v Fisher, Court of Appeal

8 February 2001
The issues

The third party insurers – duty of insurers – insured driver deliberately ramming stationary car – whether insurer liable to passenger – road traffic accident – Section 1.51

The facts

The Claimant had been injured whilst sitting in a parked car in a hotel car park. The First Defendant deliberately reversed his car and rammed the parked car. The Second Defendant, Churchill Insurance appealed against the decision of Judge Thompson to dismiss the Second Defendant’s appeal from District Judge Edward who had previously declared that the Second Defendant was obliged to indemnify the First Defendant in respect of his liability to the Claimant.

The decision

The word “accident” in an insurance policy should not be given a narrow meaning. Ac accident might well extend to any incident involving the insured’s car.

Following Gardner v Moore a person might not stand again an advantage arising from the consequences of his own inequity. This principle applied equally to motor insurance contacts. For most purposes it had the same effect as if the policy was so worded as not to apply to damage arising from the insured’s own deliberate criminal act. This applied even if the First Defendants had not known that the Claimant was in the car which he had struck. Because the incident did not occur on a road Section 1.51 had no application. The Claimant could not make a claim through F because F was not entitled to an indemnity.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up