SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 MarsdenLR 4900

SESSIONS COURT KUCHING
Noorhisham Mohd Jaafar, SCJ
MUHAMAD AZIZI MOHAMAD JALAI & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
EASON VOON PO YI & ANOR; ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (MA.... – Respondent
[Suit No: KCH-B53KJ-38-8/2024]



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Messrs David Teng & Co
For the Respondents: Messrs Ali Basah & Partners, Messrs Jimmy H T Wee & Co

The court emphasized that a proposed intervener may join proceedings if their legal and financial interests are directly affected, ensuring all matters in dispute can be comprehensively determined.

Headnote:(A) Rules of Court 2012 - Order 15 rule 6 - Road Transport Act 1987 - Section 96 - Application for intervention by insurer in motor vehicle accident case - Proposed Intervener challenged legal efficacy of Insurance Policy at time of accident. (Paras 1, 4-6, 19, 22)

(B) Legal standing to intervene - Proposed Intervener must establish necessity for participation and that its rights would be affected by the judgment - Court has discretion to allow intervention to avoid procedural inefficiencies. (Paras 8-12, 18, 25)

Facts of the case:
The case involves a motor vehicle accident where Plaintiffs filed a suit against Defendants, and the Proposed Intervener, an insurer, seeks to intervene due to concerns regarding coverage of the vehicle involved in the accident. (Paras 4, 5, 6)

Findings of Court:
The Proposed Intervener acted timeously, demonstrating a legitimate motive for intervention, enabling all matters in dispute to be adjudicated effectively. (Paras 30-32, 40)

Issues: Whether the Proposed Intervener can legally intervene in proceedings and the necessity for its participation. (Paras 19, 24, 28)

Ratio Decidendi: Intervention is appropriate when a party's legal and financial interests are directly impacted by the court's judgment, as established by precedent. The court has discretion in allowing intervention based on the merits and timing of the application. (Paras 10, 12, 25)

Result: Application to intervene allowed with costs.

Table of Content
1. application for intervention in ongoing litigation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual background regarding insurance and parties involved. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. legal provisions governing intervention in civil suits. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. burden of proof for intervention application. (Para 12 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. arguments from both parties regarding the application. (Para 14 , 15)
6. potential legal implications and financial interest of intervener. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
7. necessity of including intervener to resolve matters comprehensively. (Para 23 , 24)
8. assessment of intervention application and motives. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
9. timing and intent of the intervention application. (Para 29 , 31 , 32)
10. subrogation rights and independent representation. (Para 33 , 34)
11. delimitation of issues at the interlocutory stage. (Para 39 , 40)
12. conclusion granting intervention application. (Para 41)
Noorhisham Mohd Jaafar SCJ:

Introduction

[1] The present case concerns the application by Allianz General Insurance Company (Malaysia) Berhad (the Proposed Intervener), seeking to intervene in the action commenced by the Plaintiffs against the Defendants under Civil Suit No: KCH-B53KJ-38-8/2024 (the main action), pursuant to O 15 r 6 of the Rules of Court 2012 (the ROC 2012).

[2] I allowed the application with costs, and hereinbelow the reasons.

Relevant Cause Papers

[3] The relevant cause papers are as follows:

(i) The Proposed Intervener's Notice of Application dated 4 August 2025 (Encl 44);

(ii) The Proposed Intervener's Affidavit in Support affirmed by Nur Izzati Binti Roslan on 5 August 2025 (Encl 46);

(iii) The First and Second Plaintiffs' Affidavit in Opposition No 1 affirmed by Muhamad Azizi Bin Mohamad Jalai on 18 August 2025 (Encl 45);

(iv) The Proposed Intervener's Affidavit in Reply affirmed by Nur Izzati Binti Roslan on 3 September 2025 (Encl 47);

(v) The First and Second Plaintiffs' Affidavit in Opposition No 2 affirmed by Muhamad Azizi Bin Mohamad Jalai on 17 September 2025 (Encl 50); and

(vi) The Proposed Intervener's Affidavit in Reply affirmed by Nur Izzati Binti Roslan on 1 October 2025 (Encl 51).

Brief Facts Thus Far

[4] Stripped to its bare bones, the factual backdrop stands as follows:

(i) On 1 August 2024, the Plaintiffs commenced an action against the Defendants vide Civil Suit No: KCH-B53KJ-38-8/2024 (the main action).

(ii) The main action had its genesis in the running down action commenced by Muhamad Azizi Mohamad Jalai (the First Plaintiff) and Shadiema Khaidir (the Second Plaintiff) against Eason Voon Po Yi (the First Defendant) and David Voon Choo Yung (the Second Defendant), arising out of a motor vehicle accident alleged to have taken place on 29 May 2024 between the Plaintiffs' motorcycle, bearing registration number QCA2413 (the motorcycle) and a car Honda CR-V bearing registration number QSA6688 (the car) driven by the First Defendant. At the material time, the car belonged to the Second Defendant. In this judgment, save where reference is made to them individually, the First and Second Plaintiffs are described collectively as the Plaintiffs. The First and Second Defendants are, in the same manner, referred to as the Defendants.

(iii) By letter dated 9 July 2024, the Plaintiffs' Solicitors, Messrs Ali Basah & Partners, issued a statutory notice pursuant to s 96(2) of the Road Transport Act 1987 (the RTA ) to the insurer of the car, Allianz General Insurance Company (Malaysia) Berhad, the Proposed Intervener in these proceedings.

(iv) By letter dated 19 July 2024, the Proposed Intervener confirmed coverage of the car and subsequently Messrs Jimmy H T Wee & Co Advocates (the Defendants' Solicitors) were appointed to represent the Defendants.

(v) After the close of pleadings, on 31 October 2024, Form 1 - Agreement to Mediate [Encl 17] was filed by the Plaintiffs' Solicitors, wherein Mediation was then fixed for 19 February 2025.

(vi) On 19 February 2025, by way of E-review, the trial date for this matter was

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top