M
Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore
Person 1 case
Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore appeared as a party in the following Malaysia court case:
w-02im-1982-11-2023
Motor Insurers' Bureau of Singapore v Pacific & Orient Insurance Co. Berhad
MYCOA 22 June 2025
See the full case for complete details including judgment text, legal issues, and counsel involved.
About Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore
Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore appears as a party in 1 judgment in the MY Case Law database, spanning June 2025 to June 2025. Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore appeared as appellant in 1 case. Cases span the Court of Appeal (1).
How many court cases involve Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore?
Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore appears in 1 published judgment from June 2025 to June 2025. Most commonly as appellant (1 cases).
Practice Areas
This appeal concerns the court’s power under s 5(1)(a)(v) of the Registration and Enforcement of Judgments Act 1958 (REJA) to set aside the registration of a judgment of the Singapore High Court on the ground that the enforcement of the judgment would be contrary to public policy in Malaysia. 1 The appellant is a non-profit organisation in Singapore which operates a scheme funded by all general insurance companies and Lloyd’s Underwriters transacting compulsory motor vehicle insurance business in Singapore. The Appellant’s primary function is to ensure that victims of road traffic accidents have recourse when - 1 (1) the driver of a motor vehicle who injures a victim cannot be traced; or 1 (2) the driver of a motor vehicle who injures a victim is without effective insurance to cover his/her liability and is therefore unable to compensate the victim. 1 The Appellant carries on the same function as “Motor Insurance Bureau of West Malaysia” in West Malaysia (MIBWM). MIBWM is likewise a non-profit organisation funded by all general insurance companies in West Malaysia and insurance companies transacting compulsory motor vehicle insurance business in West Malaysia. 1 To give effect to its functions and framework, the Appellant and MIBWM, in Singapore and West Malaysia respectively, had each entered into similar arrangements governing compensation of third party victims of road accident in their respective countries. These arrangements are known as the “Principal Agreement” and “Domestic Agreements”: 1