W-01(NCVC)(W)-95-03/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

W-01(NCVC)(W)-95-03/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeals because the discharge/indemnity documents relied upon by the insurer were conditional assignments (they expressly authorised the insurer to use claimants' names at the insurer's own cost) and therefore did not vest absolute rights in the insurer to sue in its own name or to stand in the shoes of the insured; consequently the insurer lacked locus standi to maintain the action against Puspakom, JPJ, JKR and the Government and the High Court judgment awarding RM1,996,524.00 was set aside.

Citation
W-01(NCVC)(W)-95-03/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Defendant Third: PUSPAKOM SDN BHD; Plaintiff / Respondent: MULTI-PURPOSE INSURANS BHD; Defendant First (insured): SK MURNI TOURS & TRAVELS SDN. BHD.; Defendant Second: SAN EXPRESS HOLIDAY SDN. BHD.; Appellant / Defendant Fourth: KETUA PENGARAH, JABATAN PENGANGKUTAN JALANRAYA; Appellant / Defendant Fifth: KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN KERJA RAYA; Appellant / Defendant Sixth: KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
Court
NCVC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 August 2019
Case Number
W-01(NCVC)(W)-95-03/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Decision on Appeal to the Court of Appeal From High Court Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Appeals allowed in favour of Puspakom, JPJ, JKR and Government; High Court judgment set aside
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Subrogation, Assignment, Duty of Care, Indemnity, Statutory Liability, Evidence Admissibility, Quantification of Damages
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Insurance Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Road Transport Law Locus Standi Subrogation Assignment +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PUSPAKOM SDN BHD

Appellant / Defendant Third

MULTI-PURPOSE INSURANS BHD

Plaintiff / Respondent

SK MURNI TOURS & TRAVELS SDN. BHD.

Defendant First (insured)

SAN EXPRESS HOLIDAY SDN. BHD.

Defendant Second

KETUA PENGARAH, JABATAN PENGANGKUTAN JALANRAYA

Appellant / Defendant Fourth

KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN KERJA RAYA

Appellant / Defendant Fifth

KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

Appellant / Defendant Sixth

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Decision on Appeal to the Court of Appeal From High Court Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the insurer/plaintiff had locus standi to sue in its own name based on discharge/assignment forms
  2. 2 Whether the discharge vouchers constituted an absolute assignment or a conditional assignment
  3. 3 Whether defendants (Puspakom, JPJ, JKR, Government) owed a duty of care to the insurer or were liable in negligence/statutory breach

Ratio Decidendi

The Court allowed the appeals because the discharge/indemnity documents relied upon by the insurer were conditional assignments (they expressly authorised the insurer to use claimants' names at the insurer's own cost) and therefore did not vest absolute rights in the insurer to sue in its own name or to stand in the shoes of the insured; consequently the insurer lacked locus standi to maintain the action against Puspakom, JPJ, JKR and the Government and the High Court judgment awarding RM1,996,524.00 was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in favour of Puspakom, JPJ, JKR and Government; High Court judgment set aside

Orders

  • High Court judgment and orders set aside
  • Appeals allowed with costs: RM100,000.00 to Puspakom (subject to alokatur) and RM100,000.00 to JPJ, JKR and Kerajaan Malaysia (without alokatur)