The Impact of GATSOS and the Human Rights legislation on your car insurance
O’Halloran and Francis v UK (ECHR – due to be heard on 27-09-06 – Strasbourg)
This case is due to be heard by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on 27th September 2006 and could change the way the government deal with speeding offences in order to comply with the human rights legislation.
The facts of the case are that Idris Francis refused to complete and return a notice of intended prosecution, alleging he had been photographed by a speed camera doing 41mph in a 30mph zone. He believed the photograph infringed his human rights to remain silent (article 6), and he decided not to incriminate himself by completing the form and thus identifying himself as the driver of the vehicle. His argument was that the right to remain silent, a fundamental pillar of British justice for hundreds of years, was infringed. It was subsequently rejected by the High Court in March 2004
The case was then referred to the ECHR for a decision on this principle. The decision would not bind the UK government and courts, but would put the government in direct conflict with the Human Rights Act if the judgement went in favour of Mr Francis and was ignored by the government/courts. There is a strong case in favour of Mr Francis’s arguments and the fall out on insurance premiums could be significant. The reason for this is that speeding offences are part of the criminal justice system and not civil matters. A previous ECHR judgement rejected the self incrimination point in the context of a civil penalty, but the issues in relation to a criminal penalty are quite different.
The options which face the government in the event of a judgement against them include making speeding a civil penalty i.e. county court not criminal court. Offenders could be fined but could not receive penalty points on their licence, for evidence obtained from a speed camera.
The impact on insurance is that camera fines would not carry penalty points and driving bans as the evidence could not be enforced. If the evidence of speeding was obtained from a police officer or forward facing camera, which clearly photographs the driver, then this would still stand and carry penalty points and/or a ban.
However, as motor insurance premiums are calculated by including driving history in risk assessment of the insured, if speed camera fines do not carry penalty points, this would not be disclosed to the insurer. This could be potentially very difficult and the effect on premiums and driver risk assessment is unknown.
We will update you on the judgment and its impact on temporary motor insurance as soon as it is known.
