CELEX: 62017CA0122
Language: en
Date: 2018-08-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-122/17: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 7 August 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — Ireland) — David Smith v Patrick Meade, Philip Meade, FBD Insurance plc, Ireland, Attorney General (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles — Third Directive 90/232/EEC — Article 1 — Liability for personal injury caused to all passengers other than the driver — Compulsory insurance — Direct effect of directives — Obligation to disapply national legislation contrary to a directive — Non-application of a contractual clause contrary to a directive)

1.10.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 352/8
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 7 August 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — Ireland) — David Smith v Patrick Meade, Philip Meade, FBD Insurance plc, Ireland, Attorney General
      (Case C-122/17) (1)
      
      ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles - Third Directive 90/232/EEC - Article 1 - Liability for personal injury caused to all passengers other than the driver - Compulsory insurance - Direct effect of directives - Obligation to disapply national legislation contrary to a directive - Non-application of a contractual clause contrary to a directive))
      (2018/C 352/11)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Referring court
      
      Court of Appeal
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: David Smith
      
         Defendants: Patrick Meade, Philip Meade, FBD Insurance plc, Ireland, Attorney General
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      EU law, in particular Article 288 TFEU, must be interpreted as meaning that a national court, hearing a dispute between private persons, which finds that it is unable to interpret the provisions of its national law that are contrary to a provision of a directive that satisfies all the conditions required for it to produce direct effect in a manner that is compatible with that provision, is not obliged, solely on the basis of EU law, to disapply those provisions of national law and a clause to be found, as a consequence of those provisions of national law, in an insurance contract.
      In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, a party adversely affected by the incompatibility of national law with EU law or a person subrogated to the rights of that party could however rely on the case-law arising from the judgment of 19 November 1991, Francovich and Others (C 6/90 and C 9/90, EU:C:1991:428), in order to obtain from the Member State, if justified, compensation for any loss sustained.
      
         (1)  OJ C 151, 15.5.2017.