An insurance policy is not valid if purchased after the occurrence of an accident; the principle of utmost good faith mandates full disclosure of all material facts.

[1] This was an application by the Plaintiff via Originating Summons for a declaration in respect of the enforceability of an insurance policy under s 96(3) of the Road Transport Act 1987 ("this Application").

[2] The 1st Defendant did not file any affidavit in respect of this Application, and neither did he appear in person or by way of legal representation. Hence, only the 2nd Defendant opposed this Application.

[3] After hearing the submissions from learned counsel for the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant and having considered the affidavit evidence presented by both parties, I found in favour of the Plaintiff. These are the grounds for my decision.

[A] Salient Background Facts

[4] The Plaintiff is the insurer for the motorcar bearing registration number AMC 3014, which is registered under the name of the 1st Defendant, pursuant to insurance policy number T0021317 ("Policy No T0021317").

[5] On 8 November 2022, at approximately 11:20 am, a road traffic accident occurred at Jalan Ampang involving motorcar No AMC 3014 driven by the 1st Defendant and motorcycle No VGH 5435 ridden by the 2nd Defendant.

[6] The 1st Defendant made a police report regarding the accident on the same day at 6:24 pm, stating that he was driving motorcar No AMC 3014 from Petronas Taman Dagang heading towards Taman Kosas when the accident occurred at a traffic light junction. The 1st Defendant claimed that he heard a siren from behind and moved to give way, and at the same time, a motorcycle No VGH 5435, came from his right side and collided with the right front section of his car.

[7] The 2nd Defendant also lodged a police report on 9 November 2022 at 9:31 am, stating that he was riding motorcycle No VGH 5435 from Bandar Baru Ampang towards Perkeso Jalan Ampang when, at a green light, motorcar No AMC 3014 emerged from a junction at high speed, and he was unable to avoid the collision. As a result, he suffered injuries to his left hand and right leg and had to be taken to the hospital by ambulance.

[8] Following the accident, the 2nd Defendant, through his solicitors, Messrs N M Tiong & Co, served a notice under s 96(2) of the Road Transport Act 1987 , dated 13 January 2023, on the Plaintiff regarding his intention to claim against the 1st Defendant.

[9] In response to this notice, the 2nd Defendant's solicitors also sent a letter to the Plaintiff seeking confirmation of insurance coverage for the vehicle No AMC 3014 at the material time of the accident. The insurer would naturally require time to examine the facts and documents before confirming whether the accident is covered by the policy, even if there is a policy in existence.

[10] Upon investigation, the Plaintiff discovered that:

(i) the insurance Policy No T0021317 was purchased by the 1st Defendant on 8 November 2022 at 12:39 pm, which is approximately 1 hour and 19 minutes after the accident occurred at 11:20 am;

(ii) the previous insurance policy for motorcar No AMC 3014 had lapsed on 17 October 2022, and the vehicle was being driven without valid insurance coverage at the time of the accident;

(iii) the Certificate of Insurance and Schedule for Policy No T0021317 clearly specified that the policy was only effective from 12:39pm on 8 November 2022 until 11:59pm on 7 November 2023; and

(iv) when purchasing the insurance policy, the 1st Defendant did not disclose to the Plaintiff that the motorcar had been involved in an accident earlier that day.

[11] On 9 February 2023, the 1st