When illegal acts don’t drive away your claims

In Ali v HSF Logistics, the Court of Appeal considered the illegality defence (aka ex turpi causa) that a claimant should not be able to pursue a cause of action arising from its own illegal act. It held that not having a valid MOT certificate did not prevent a driver from claiming damages for a hire car following a crash with a lorry.

No MOT

A's Volvo, whose MOT certificate had expired some four and a half months prior, was negligently damaged and rendered unroadworthy by an HSF Logistics lorry. A brought a credit hire claim for hiring a replacement vehicle whilst his car was being repaired.

Lower courts: the “causation defence”

The County Court and High Court found that A's claim failed on the basis of what was termed the “causation defence”: namely that A suffered no loss as a result of the tort committed by the lorry driver as A did not have a vehicle that was usable prior to the accident, so it followed that there could be no claim for loss of use.

The Court of Appeal: back to basics

Disagreeing, the Court of Appeal held that the absence of a valid MOT certificate did not change the fact that A had been deprived of the use of his car, whether lawful or not. 

In using his vehicle without an MOT, A was committing a criminal offence, but one which “did not carry very great weight when considering proportionality”. The court therefore agreed that refusing A’s credit hire claim because of a “relatively minor” offence would raise “immediate and troubling questions of proportionality”. 

Not having a valid MOT certificate was considered akin to other minor road traffic offences such as having defective windscreen wipers or a defective headlight, both of which were less culpable than offences such as driving without insurance or having bald tyres, which carry greater financial penalties and the risk of disqualification.

Notably, the court said that the law should not be “unduly precious” about minor infractions of criminal law and their effects on a civil claim.

The case is a reminder that, following Patel v Mirza, illegality will not automatically deprive you of a claim.

Judgment: Ali v HSF Logistics