Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Section 96 rta declarations

Legal area

Court

18 Feb 2022

BERJAYA SOMPO INSURANS BERHAD 1. ) SHAMISHA HOLIDAY & TRAVEL SDN. BHD. 2. ) SYAAIDIN BIN ISHAK 3. ) KHASIMI BIN HANAPI

Citation

WA-24NCC-81-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-81-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The policy was declared void ab initio because it was entered into after the 1st Defendant had been wound up and there was no evidence the liquidator authorised the transaction; the undisputed material misrepresentations about the insured vehicle further justified avoidance under s96(3) RTA and Schedule 9 FSA, entitling the insurer to declaratory relief.
27 Aug 2021

AMGENERAL INSURANCE BERHAD (44191-P) 1. MOHAMAD KASSIM BIN SAAD 2. SABER BIN ABDUL HASHIM 3. MUHAMMAD AMIRRUL BIN MOHD YUSOF

Citation

WA-24NCC-49-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-49-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the insured vehicle had been sold: documentary evidence was absent, the statutory declaration exhibited significant gaps and delay undermined credibility; accordingly the first defendant remains the registered owner and insured for RTA purposes, and under the Court of Appeal authority (Muhamad Haqimie) and ss91/94/96/109 RTA the insurer cannot obtain the declaration to render the policy void as against the third party; result: originating summons dismissed.