Gloss to the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 29 October 2021 (Request for a Preliminary Ruling from the District Court in Opatów – Poland) HG and TC v. the Insurance Guarantee Fund, Case C-688/20

Aleksander Raczyński
{"title":"Gloss to the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 29 October 2021 (Request for a Preliminary Ruling from the District Court in Opatów – Poland) HG and TC v. the Insurance Guarantee Fund, Case C-688/20","authors":"Aleksander Raczyński","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0015.7926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The publication is an approving gloss to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 29 October 2021 in Case C-688/20, HG and TC v. the Insurance Guarantee Fund. The judgment addresses two important issues: on the one hand, the scope of compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103 and, on the other hand, the relationship between EU legislation (in this case directives) and national regulations.\nIn the context of the compatibility of the criteria for the existence of an insurance obligation under the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103 (5th Motor Directive), the Court of Justice upheld the earlier line of case-law in a logical and consistent way, by referring to the formal condition that a vehicle is registered and roadworthy in accordance with the national legislation in force.\nThat judgment indicates the discrepancy between national and EU legislations in terms of the conditions for compulsory insurance. Although Article 23(1) of the Law on Compulsory Insurance, the Insurance Guarantee Fund and the Polish Motor Insurers' Bureau links the insurance obligation with the mere fact of a vehicle ownership, the interpretation of the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103 presented by the Court of Justice allows for the exemption from that obligation in the event of formal deregistration of a vehicle or its withdrawal from use under relevant national regulations. Nevertheless, the existence of such discrepancy is not an objection to the commented judgment. It is the role of the Court of Justice to ensure that EU legislation is interpreted in an autonomous and uniform manner throughout the European Union.\n\n","PeriodicalId":277138,"journal":{"name":"Prawo Asekuracyjne","volume":"11 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prawo Asekuracyjne","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.7926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The publication is an approving gloss to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 29 October 2021 in Case C-688/20, HG and TC v. the Insurance Guarantee Fund. The judgment addresses two important issues: on the one hand, the scope of compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103 and, on the other hand, the relationship between EU legislation (in this case directives) and national regulations. In the context of the compatibility of the criteria for the existence of an insurance obligation under the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103 (5th Motor Directive), the Court of Justice upheld the earlier line of case-law in a logical and consistent way, by referring to the formal condition that a vehicle is registered and roadworthy in accordance with the national legislation in force. That judgment indicates the discrepancy between national and EU legislations in terms of the conditions for compulsory insurance. Although Article 23(1) of the Law on Compulsory Insurance, the Insurance Guarantee Fund and the Polish Motor Insurers' Bureau links the insurance obligation with the mere fact of a vehicle ownership, the interpretation of the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103 presented by the Court of Justice allows for the exemption from that obligation in the event of formal deregistration of a vehicle or its withdrawal from use under relevant national regulations. Nevertheless, the existence of such discrepancy is not an objection to the commented judgment. It is the role of the Court of Justice to ensure that EU legislation is interpreted in an autonomous and uniform manner throughout the European Union.
对欧盟法院2021年10月29日判决(要求波兰Opatów地区法院作出初步裁决)HG和TC诉保险保证基金案C-688/20的注释
该出版物是对欧盟法院于2021年10月29日在案件C-688/20, HG和TC诉保险保证基金案中判决的认可注释。该判决解决了两个重要问题:一方面,根据指令2009/103第3条第1段,针对机动车辆使用的民事责任强制保险的范围,另一方面,欧盟立法(在这种情况下是指令)与国家法规之间的关系。在第2009/103号指令(第5号汽车指令)第3条第1段规定的保险义务存在标准的兼容性背景下,法院以逻辑和一致的方式维护了判例法的早期路线,参考了车辆根据现行国家立法进行注册和可上路的正式条件。这一判决表明,就强制保险的条件而言,各国立法与欧盟立法之间存在差异。尽管《强制保险法》第23(1)条、保险保证基金和波兰汽车保险局将保险义务与车辆所有权的事实联系起来,但法院提交的第2009/103号指令第3条第1段的解释允许在车辆正式注销或根据相关国家法规退出使用的情况下免除该义务。然而,这种差异的存在并不是对评论判断的异议。法院的作用是确保欧盟立法在整个欧盟以自主和统一的方式解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信