Martin Cameron v. Melissa Beth Gellatly & Axa Corporate Solutions Services UK Ltd [2009] CSOH 82

On 12 May 2007, the pursuer was leaning into the rear nearside door of a stationary taxi in Perth when a car being driven by the defender collided with the taxi. As a result the pursuer was injured. The pursuer raised an action against the defender in which he sought damages of £500,000. The minuters defended the action on the basis that they insured the vehicle driven by the defender and the defender was not insured under the relevant policy at the time of the accident because she was driving the vehicle without the policy holder's permission, and the minuters would be obliged to satisfy any judgement obtained by the pursuer against the defender under section 151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The effect of section 151 is to make the minuters liable to the pursuer as if the defender was covered, albeit they would have a right of recovery against the defender. Here the pursuer enrolled a motion for interim damages which was opposed by the minuters on the ground that it was incompetent because it did not fall within the terms of Rule of Court 43.11(5). If an award was competent, it was agreed that an interim payment of £27,500 should be made. Rule of Court 43.11(5) provides:- "(5) No order shall be made against a defender under this Rule unless it appears to the court that the defender is - (a) A person who is insured in respect of the claim of the pursuer; (aa) A person who is not insured but in respect of whose liability the Motor Insurers' Bureau will be liable to make payment; ..." Here the court considered whether the pursuer's application was competent.