Doroudvash v Zurich Insurance Plc [2025] EWCC 10 - Philip Matthews, Temple Garden Chambers
19/05/25. In Doroudvash, the Court determined a claimant’s application to join an additional defendant into an action after the expiry of the primary limitation period.
Background
Two police constables – PC Sehmi and PC Doroudvash – were responding to an emergency call. PC Sehmi was driving; PC Doroudvash was his passenger. The police car was travelling at 87mph in a 30mph zone when it came into collision with a third-party vehicle driven by a Mr Tarnowski. Both he and PC Doroudvash sustained personal injury. PC Sehlmi was later convicted of causing injury by dangerous driving.
Mr Tarnowski brought an action against the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, who admitted liability under section 88 of the Police Act 1996. No argument of contributory negligence was raised. The case settled without trial.
Separately, PC Doroudvash pursued a claim under the European Communities (Rights Against Insurers) Regulations 2002 directly against Mr Tarnowski’s insurer, Zurich Insurance. Zurich initially admitted full liability but later successfully applied to resile from that admission (and to bring a contribution claim against the Commissioner).
Consequently, PC Dorouvadash made an application to join the Commissioner as a Second Defendant (after the primary limitation period had expired). It is on this application that the judgment focused.
The Rules
The Civil Procedure Rules draw a distinction between applications to add/substitute a party...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/marcyano
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
