Date Event Description Reference(s) Not specified Initiation of legal proceedings by the plaintiff acting as an agent for the principal parties. (!) (!) Not specified Court's decision that the plaintiff lacked standing to enforce the contract due to privity of contract. (!) (!) (!) Not specified Court's ruling that contractual enforcement mechanisms are exclusive and that bypassing them is an abuse of process. (!) (!) Not specified Determination that the defendant did not assume liability under the transfer agreement. (!) (!) Not specified Clarification that the High Court's confirmation order did not extend liability to the defendant for third-party liabilities. (!) Not specified Affirmation that arbitration agreements do not restrict courts from hearing matters outside arbitration scope. (!) (!) (!)

MMIP SERVICES SDN BHD vs OVERSEAS ASSURANCE CORPORATION (MALAYSIA) BERHAD; IUB GREENGOLD BERHAD (THI....

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 MarsdenLR 27

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
MMIP SERVICES SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
OVERSEAS ASSURANCE CORPORATION (MALAYSIA) BERHAD; IUB GREENGOLD BERHAD (THI.... – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Sreether Sundaram ,Respondent Advocate: M Nagarajah,Michael Anthony

Judgement Key Points

Date	Event Description	Reference(s)
Not specified	Initiation of legal proceedings by the plaintiff acting as an agent for the principal parties.	(!) (!)
Not specified	Court's decision that the plaintiff lacked standing to enforce the contract due to privity of contract.	(!) (!) (!)
Not specified	Court's ruling that contractual enforcement mechanisms are exclusive and that bypassing them is an abuse of process.	(!) (!)
Not specified	Determination that the defendant did not assume liability under the transfer agreement.	(!) (!)
Not specified	Clarification that the High Court's confirmation order did not extend liability to the defendant for third-party liabilities.	(!)
Not specified	Affirmation that arbitration agreements do not restrict courts from hearing matters outside arbitration scope.	(!) (!) (!)

JUDGMENT

Wong Kian Kheong JC:

A. Introduction

[1] This suit ("this suit") concerns, among others, the following issues:

(1) whether the plaintiff company ("plaintiff"), an "Administration Manager" of the "Malaysian Motor Insurance Pool" ("MIMP"), has the right and/or power to file this suit in the plaintiffs own name to enforce the "High Risks Motor Insurance Pool Collective Agreement" (" CA ") dated 16 November 1992 when, among others:

(a) the plaintiff is not a party to the CA ;

(b) the plaintiff as an agent cannot file this suit in the plaintiffs name on behalf of the plaintiffs principal;

(d) the CA has expressly provided for a specific mechanism to enforce the by parties specified in the .

(2) whether the liability of the third party in this suit (Tahan Insurance Malaysia Bhd ("TIMB")) to make contributions to the MIMP under the CA ("TIMBs liability") had been assumed by the defendant company (defendant) by reason of the "Business Portfolio Transfer Agreement" dated 18 August 2012 (BPTA) between the defendant and TIMB;

(3) whether the High Courts order dated 15 October 2010 confirming

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 MarsdenLR 27

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPURMMIP SERVICES SDN BHD – AppellantVersusOVERSEAS ASSURANCE CORPORATION (MALAYSIA) BERHAD; IUB GREENGOLD BERHAD (THI.... – Respondent

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
MMIP SERVICES SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
OVERSEAS ASSURANCE CORPORATION (MALAYSIA) BERHAD; IUB GREENGOLD BERHAD (THI.... – Respondent