Back
HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK KOTA KINABALU
SING YUNG STEEL SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
MSIG INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BERHAD & ANO – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. basis of marine insurance claims (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. evidence of pre-shipment condition (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. post-shipment damage analysis (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. extent of cargo damages (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. coverage of marine cargo insurance policy (Para 39 , 40 , 46 , 47) |
| 6. interpretation of exclusion clauses (Para 74 , 77 , 80 , 86) |
| 7. rod exclusion clause interpretation (Para 274 , 275 , 276 , 277) |
| 8. burden of proof in insurance claims (Para 278 , 279 , 280) |
Introduction
[1] This is a claim by the Plaintiff under a marine All-Risks cargo insurance policy number KK-87495196-MAR (the marine Policy) for the damage sustained by the insured cargo comprising of 305 Bundles of 12m steel bars (Type T16, T20, T25 and T32) Commercial Invoice No 4070000114 weighing 637.70 MT amounting to RM963,520.01.
[2] The 1st Defendant (insurer) and 2nd Defendant (insurance agent) disputed the Plaintiff's claim mainly on the ground that the liability for the loss and damage to the insured cargo was excluded by the ROD Exclusion Clause which excludes the risks of rusting, oxidation and discolouration howsoever caused. The 1st Defendant als
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
