1. ) Mohd Suhairi Bin Alias (Seorang Yang Kurang Upaya Dan Membawa Tindakan Ini Melalui Ibu Yang Sah Danwakil Litigasi Beliau Iaitu Pemohon/pencelah Kedua) 2. ) Rasmawati Binti Yaacob v 1. ) TUNE INSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD 2. ) TUAN SOM BINTI TUAN KADIR 3. ) ZURINA BINTI OTHMAN

w-02ncca-1160-06-2021 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 12 January 2025 • W-02(NCC)(A)-1160-06/2021 • 25 min read
4 cases cited (0 SG, 4 foreign)

Catchwords

Section 96(3) RTA application by insurer - Insurance policy renewed after accident - Time of renewal stated in cover note - Whether insurance policy operative - Whether doctrine of waiver applies

Practice Areas

Section 96(3) RTA application by insurer

Judges (3)

Choo Kah Sing Coram Mohd Nazlan bin Mohd Ghazali Coram Ravinthran a/l Paramaguru Delivered

Counsel (11)

Kames & Associates Firm Khalil Surinder & Associates Firm G Naidu Counsel Appellant G. K Ganesan Counsel Appellant JN Lheela Counsel Appellant K.N. Geetha Counsel Appellant Kameswary a/p Ramasamy Counsel Appellant Raymond Sivasothey Counsel Respondent Roshvinder Singh Counsel Respondent Satvinder Singh Gill Counsel Respondent TP Vaani Counsel Appellant

Parties (5)

TUNE INSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD Respondent Mohd Suhairi bin Alias Appellant Rasmawati binti Yaacob Appellant Tuan Som binti Tuan Kadir Respondent Zurina binti Othman Respondent

Case Significance

1. ) Mohd Suhairi Bin Alias (Seorang Yang Kurang Upaya Dan Membawa Tindakan I... is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated January 12, 2025 (citation: w-02ncca-1160-06-2021). <p>This appeal concerned whether a motor insurance policy was enforceable under section 96(3) of the Road Transport Act 1987 where the policy was purchased approximately one hour after the accident. The Court of Appeal held that the insurer's right to obtain a declaration that the policy did not cover the accident was not discriminatory against the third-party victim, and affirmed the High Court's decision dismissing the appeal with costs of RM5,000.</p> The panel comprised Choo Kah Sing, Mohd Nazlan bin Mohd Ghazali and Ravinthran a/l Paramaguru, with Ravinthran a/l Paramaguru delivering the judgment.

Key issues: Section 96(3) RTA application by insurer - Insurance policy renewed after accident - Time of renewal stated in cover note - Whether insurance policy operative - Whether doctrine of waiver applies.

Summary

This appeal concerned whether a motor insurance policy was enforceable under section 96(3) of the Road Transport Act 1987 where the policy was purchased approximately one hour after the accident. The Court of Appeal held that the insurer's right to obtain a declaration that the policy did not cover the accident was not discriminatory against the third-party victim, and affirmed the High Court's decision dismissing the appeal with costs of RM5,000.

What was the outcome of 1. ) Mohd Suhairi Bin Alias (Seorang Yang Kurang Upaya Dan Membawa Tindakan I...?

<p>This appeal concerned whether a motor insurance policy was enforceable under section 96(3) of the Road Transport Act 1987 where the policy was purc...

Statutes Cited

Federal Constitution
Art 8
Financial Services Act 2013
s 84
Insurance Act 1996
s 141
Road Transport Act 1987
s 96(3)
Road Transport Act 1987 (Cap 333)
s 96(2)
Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (4)

MY (4)
[2000] 1 MLJ 50 [2015] 9 CLJ 821 [2018] 12 MLJ 1 [2019] 12 MLJ 763