The Motor Vehicles Insurance Directive and the Nullifying of an Insurance Policy? Case C 236/23 introduces an Abuse of Rights Defence

The Court of Justice, on 19 September 2024, delivered its ruling on Case C 236/23, Mutuelle assurance des travailleurs mutualistes (Matmut) v TN and others, a decision based on the correct interpretation of Articles 3 and 13 of the Motor Vehicles Insurance Directive 2009/103/EC (MVID). The MVID has proven significant for its expanding protection of third-party victims of motor vehicle accidents and the establishing across the Member States of a framework for the insurance of civil liability in respect of motor vehicles, aimed at ensuring that victims of road traffic accidents are adequately compensated, regardless of the responsible party’s insurance status. The request for a preliminary ruling arose in proceedings involving Matmut (the insurer of the policyholder and passenger victim in the case, PQ), TN (the driver of the vehicle at fault for the accident), MAAF assurances SA (the insurer of the other vehicle in the accident), the Fonds de garantie des assurances obligatoires de dommages (FGAO) (the national guarantee fund body in France), and PQ. The case centred on the enforceability of the nullity of a motor vehicle liability insurance contract between PQ and Matmut, in light of a misrepresentation made by PQ regarding the usual driver of the vehicle at the time of the application and the granting of the policy.