Pacific & Orient Insurance v Motor Insurers’ Bureau: Liability for Singapore Judgment
The High Court of Singapore heard two originating summonses, OS No 808 of 2011 and OS No 580 of 2011, involving Pacific & Orient Insurance Company Berhad (P&O Insurance) and the Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Singapore (MIB). The central legal issue was whether P&O Insurance, a Malaysian insurer, was liable to satisfy a Singapore judgment obtained by Ganesan against P&O Insurance's policyholder, Ravi, for a traffic accident in Singapore. The court ruled in favor of MIB, declaring that P&O Insurance was obligated to satisfy the judgment under the Special Agreement, dismissing P&O Insurance's application.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Declaration granted in favor of Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Singapore; application by Pacific & Orient Insurance dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Malaysian insurer P&O Insurance is liable under a Special Agreement to satisfy a Singapore judgment obtained against its policyholder for a traffic accident.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Bhd (formerly known as Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Sdn Bhd) | Defendant, Applicant | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | Harry Elias, Francis Goh Siong Pheck, Tan Huilin Bernice |
| Motor Insurers' Bureau Of Singapore | Plaintiff, Respondent | Other | Declaration Granted | Won | Andre Yeap, Lai Yew Fei, Sharmila Jit Chandran |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Quentin Loh | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Harry Elias | Harry Elias Partnership |
| Francis Goh Siong Pheck | Harry Elias Partnership |
| Tan Huilin Bernice | Harry Elias Partnership |
| Andre Yeap | Rajah & Tann |
| Lai Yew Fei | Rajah & Tann |
| Sharmila Jit Chandran | Rajah & Tann |
4. Facts
- Ravi, a Malaysian, riding his Malaysian-registered motorcycle with Ganesan riding pillion, collided with a lorry in Singapore.
- Ganesan was injured and commenced Suit 460 against Ravi and the lorry driver.
- Final judgment in the sum of S$243,983.68 was entered in Ganesan’s favour, with Ravi bearing 75% of the blame.
- P&O Insurance had issued a policy to Ravi in Malaysia but disclaimed liability, stating Ravi had not taken out pillion rider cover.
- MIB took the position that P&O Insurance was an “Insurer Concerned” under the Special Agreement and should settle the judgment.
- P&O Insurance disagreed that it was an “Insurer Concerned” and refused to settle the judgment.
5. Formal Citations
- Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Bhd (formerly known as Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Sdn Bhd) v Motor Insurers’ Bureau Of Singapore, Originating Summons No 808 of 2011 and No 580 of 2011, [2012] SGHC 202
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Singapore incorporated. | |
| MIB entered into the Principal Agreement with the Minister of Finance and the Domestic Agreement with insurance companies. | |
| Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Bhd signed the Special Agreement with MIB. | |
| Singapore made passenger cover mandatory through an amendment to the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Risks and Compensation) Act. | |
| MIB entered into a Supplemental Agreement with its members. | |
| P&O Insurance issued a policy to Ravi a/l Mariappen in Malaysia. | |
| Traffic accident occurred in Singapore involving Ravi a/l Mariappen and Mohammel Hoque Aminul Hoque. | |
| Ganesan’s lawyers notified MIB of proceedings against Ravi. | |
| Final judgment of S$243,983.68 was entered in Ganesan’s favour. | |
| Originating Summons No 808 of 2011 and No 580 of 2011 were filed. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Liability of Insurer
- Outcome: The court held that P&O Insurance was liable to satisfy the judgment obtained by Ganesan.
- Category: Substantive
- Interpretation of Special Agreement
- Outcome: The court construed the Special Agreement as binding P&O Insurance to the obligations imposed on members of the MIB by the Domestic Agreement.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration
- Indemnity
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Insurance Litigation
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Insurance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cosmic Insurance Corp Ltd v Ong Kah Hoe (trading as Ong Industrial Supplies) and another | High Court | Yes | [1996] SGHC 42 | Singapore | Discusses a situation where the insurer would not be liable to make payment if the insured had acted outside of the terms of the policy. |
| Cosmic Insurance Corp Ltd v Ong Kah Hoe (trading as Ong Industrial Supplies) and another | High Court | Yes | [1997] SGHC 237 | Singapore | Mentioned as a case decided on grounds not relevant to the issues in the present proceedings. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Motor Vehicles (Third Party Risks and Compensation) Act | Singapore |
| Road Traffic Act of 1930 (c 43) | UK |
| Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (Cap 189, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (Chapter 88) | Singapore |
| Malaysian Road Traffic Ordinance 1958 (Ord 49 of 1958) | Malaysia |
| Road Transport Act 1987 (Act 333) | Malaysia |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Special Agreement
- Motor Insurers’ Bureau
- Insurer Concerned
- Compulsory Insurance Legislation
- Pillion Rider
- Domestic Agreement
- Principal Agreement
15.2 Keywords
- insurance
- motor vehicle
- accident
- liability
- Singapore
- Malaysia
16. Subjects
- Insurance
- Motor Vehicle Accidents
- Contract Law
17. Areas of Law
- Insurance Law
- Motor Vehicle Law
- Contract Law