Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU OF SINGAPORE – Appellant
Versus
PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO BHD – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)-1982-11-2023]
The Tirumeniwar case primarily revolves around the principles governing the enforcement of foreign judgments and the scope of public policy as a ground for refusal. The key issue concerns whether the enforcement of a foreign judgment should be refused on public policy grounds, especially when the grounds cited are related to policy considerations rather than fundamental legal principles.
In this case, the court emphasized that the public policy exception should be applied narrowly and restrictively. It clarified that only clear, fundamental, and incontestable public policy issues that would shock the conscience or be wholly injurious to the public good warrant refusal of enforcement (!) . The court underscored that the statutory right to challenge registration under the relevant legislation is a matter of statutory interpretation and cannot be overridden by broader doctrines, especially when the foreign judgment lacks detailed reasoning on public policy issues (!) .
Furthermore, the court highlighted that considerations such as potential impacts on local statutory provisions or policy freedoms do not automatically constitute valid public policy grounds for resisting enforcement unless they reach a level that would offend the fundamental principles of the jurisdiction’s legal system (!) . It reinforced the notion that enforcement should generally be upheld unless there is a compelling and specific public policy reason to oppose it, emphasizing respect for international reciprocity and comity (!) .
Overall, the Tirumeniwar case reaffirmed that the enforcement of foreign judgments must be approached with restraint, and public policy should only be invoked in exceptional circumstances that are clear and unequivocal, rather than on policy considerations that are speculative or peripheral (!) .
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's power under reja. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. litigation history of parties. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. personal injury suit details. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. relevant case law on judgment. (Para 23) |
| 5. high court's initial judgment. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. arguments from both counsel. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 7. issues raised in this appeal. (Para 29) |
| 8. stare decisis and precedence. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 9. statutory rights under reja. (Para 32 , 33) |
| 10. public policy considerations in reja. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 11. court's conclusion and order. (Para 58 , 59) |
A. Introduction
[1] This appeal concerns the court's power under s 5(1)(a)(v) of the Reciprocal 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.
B. Background
B(1). The Motor Insurers' Bureaux In West Malaysia And Singapore
[2] The appellant (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) the driver of a motor vehicle who injures a victim cannot be traced; or
(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.
[3] The Appellant carries on the same function as "Motor Insurers' 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.
[4] 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 accidents in their respective countries. These arrangements are known as the "Principal Agreement' and "Domestic Agreements":
Appellant's Contractual Framework in Singapore
MIBWM's Contractual Framework in West Malaysia
[5] To compel Singapore motor-insurance companies transacting motor insurance in West Malaysia to comply with local Malaysian laws, Singapore insurers entered into "special agreements" with MIBWM. This arrangement also applies in Singapore between the Appellant and the respondent insurance company (Respondent).
[6] Following the Singapore Domestic Agreement, Malaysian insurance companies transacting motor insurance in Singapore executed contracts known as "special agreements" with the Appellant. One such special agreement is the special agreement dated 15 September 1975 between the Appellant and the Respondent (Special Agreement).
[7] According to cl 2 of the Special Agreement, the Respondent agreed to be bound by the Singapore Domestic Agreement. Reproduced below is cl 2 of the Special Agreement:
"The [Respondent] further covenants with the [Appellant] that it will comply with every obligation imposed upon the Members of the Bureau by the [Singapore Domestic Agreement] between the [Appellant] and the Members (a copy whereof is annexed hereto) in every way as if the [Respondent] were an "insurer" for the purpose of the said [Singapore Domestic Agreement] and in particular undertakes and binds itself to the [Appellant] to make any payment demanded under cls 6 and 7 of the said [Singapore Domestic Agreement] and to furnish the Council of the [Appellant] such particulars or its premium income as the Council may require".
(Emphasis added).
[8] Clause 1 of the Singapore Domestic Agreement has defined "Compulsory Insurance Legislation" as follows:
" "Compulsory Insu
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
