JUDGMENT

Syed Ahmad Helmy JC:

This is the appellant's application for review of the taxed costs awarded by the learned deputy registrar in respect of the respondent's bill of costs dated 20 December 1999 relating to the item of getting up under Item 41 thereof.

The respondent had earlier filed her notice for taxation of costs on 23 December 1999 together with her bill of costs in encl. 25. The appellant, save for Item 41 on getting up, conceded to all items in the respondent's bill of costs. The bill came up for taxation before the learned senior assistant registrar, who after hearing counsels for the appellant and for the respondent on Item 41, allowed the sum of RM90,000 for getting up.

Both appellant and respondent filed a summons for review of the sum awarded for getting up; the appellant's summons and grounds therefore is found in encl. 32, while the respondent's summons and grounds for review is found in encl. 35.

On 14 May 2002, the learned deputy registrar, after hearing counsels' submissions on encls. 32 and 35, dismissed the appellant's application for review and allowed the respondent's application for review and enhanced the award for getting up to RM200,000.

To appreciate the quantum of the award made by the learned deputy registrar it is only appropriate at this juncture to relate the subject matter upon which the bill of costs was founded.

Facts Of The Case

The respondent at the material time was a passenger in a vehicle owned by her husband and was on her way to work at the central market in Jalan Wong Ah Fook, Johor Bahru. The said vehicle at the material time was being driven by her son, the respondent's husband's authorised driver.

On the journey to the respondent's place of work, the said vehicle was involved in an accident caused by the recklessness of the driver (the respondent's son). The respondent suffered injuries as a result of the said accident and consequently the respondent filed Civil Action No. 53-218-1989-1 in the Sessions Court at Johor Bahru against her husband and her son, as the authorised driver, for damages for the injuries she sustained.

The respondent obtained judgment against her husband in the said civil action in the sum of RM76,400 for special and general damages and RM6,875 and interest thereon. Upon obtaining the said judgment, the respondent commenced enforcement proceedings against the appellant videCivil Action No. 52-804-1991-3 pursuant to the provisions of s. 96 of the Road Transport Act 1987. The appellant is the insurance company that insured the respondent's husband's vehicle.

The appellant defended the action. The parties agreed to the dispensation of witnesses and proceeded with submission based on a set of agreed facts and issues which agreed facts are as follows:

a. the respondent and her son are members of the insured's household, that is the respondent's husband;

b. the accident that formed the basis of Civil Action No. 53-218-1989-1 occurred on 4 June 1988;

c. at the time the accident occurred, the respondent was seated in the front passenger seat of the vehicle beside her son who was driving the vehicle;

d. the respondent's son was authorised and was driving the vehicle with his father's consent, that is the insurance policy holder's consent. Consequently, the son was the authorised driver at the material time;

e. at the time the accident occurred, the respondent was on her way to her place of work, namely, a stall in the Central Market, Jalan Wong Ah Fook, Johor Bahru.

f. the respondent was paid a monthly wage of RM450 by her employer.

The issues that were placed before the trial judge for the courts consideration was two fold namely:

1. Whether the insurance company was liable under the insurance policy it issued to the respondent's husband to pay to the respondent the judgment sum obtained on 21 November, 1991, particularly under cl. 1(a) s. II and cl. 9 Endorsement D; and

2. Whether the judgment in Civil Action No. 53-218-1989-1, the enforcement of which was do