[1]The above two appeals (2 Appeals) are heard together and discuss the effect of s 96(1) and (3)Road Transport Act 1987RTA) [as interpreted by the recent Federal Court’s judgment delivered by Abdul Rahman Sebli FCJ (as he then was) in AmGeneral Insurance Bhd v Sa’ Amran a/l Atan & Ors and other appeals [2022] 5 MLJ 825Sa’ Amran)] on, among others, the following two suits:

(1)an action filed by a plaintiff (Claimant) for damages from a defendant (Insured) based on the Insured’s negligence [Claimant’s Suit (Insured’s Liability)] regarding an incident involving a “motor vehicle” (defined in s 2 RTA ); and

(2)a suit instituted by an insurer of the Insured (Insurer) under s 96(3) RTAPolicy) issued by the Insurer to the Insured [Insurer’s Suit (Policy Invalidation)].

B. Background

[2]For ease of reference, we shall refer to parties as they were in the Sessions Court.

[3]The second plaintiff (2^nd Plaintiff) is the registered owner of a motorcycle bearing the registration no. PER 6664 (Motorcycle).

[4]At about 2.20 am, 3.9.2014 -

(1)the first plaintiff (1^st Plaintiff) was riding the Motorcycle along Jalan Skudai Pantai Lido, Johor, when the 1^st Plaintiff alleged that a motorcycle with the reg