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



JUDGMENT

Azmi CJ (Malaya):

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court at Malacca under which the appellants as authorised insurers were ordered to pay to the respondents a sum of $2,777.55 being a judgment, including costs, obtained by the respondents against one Abdul Karim bin Mohamed Nor alias Hashim bin Mohamed Nor, in reference to the negligent driving of a motor car No SR 4805 by the said Abdul Karim.

There were several grounds of appeal, but after objections made by Mr. Cashin for the respondents to the other grounds Mr. Sault proceeded on the following two grounds only: -

The learned trial Judge ought to have held in any event that Lau Teek Siew had no insurable interest in the driving of the insured car No SR 4805 by Karhn bin Mohamed Nor who was alleged to have driven with Lau Teck Siew's consent but not as his servant or agent.

The learned Judge was wrong in law in holding that the said agreement was an agreement to sell or a conditional contract of sale or any incipient hirepurchase agreement.

The learned trial Judge in his judgment says:

In view of what I have stated above and in view of the fact that the Trading Company regarded themselves as the ow

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top