When Is a Judgment Not Worth the Paper It Is Printed On? [Sa’Amran 6/11]

An insurer raced to the High Court for a declaration that it owed nothing — before the trial court had decided whether its rider was even in the accident. It won. The victim then won his trial. Two judgments, one collision, and a paper judgment not worth the paper it is printed on. The Federal Court called it a serious error of law and fact — and a breach of ...

Read More

Has the RTA made the ‘insurable interest defence’ and the ‘recovery action,’ redundant?

Should innocent accident victims be forced into costly legal battles twice—once against the driver and again, [by what has come to be known as a ‘Recover Action’] against the insurer? How did Malaysia’s Federal Court in the 2022 Sa' Amran decision demolish 70 years of established insurance practice? How did it revolutionise third-party victim compensation?

Read More

Did the Malaysian Federal Court in AmGeneral v Sa’Amran revolutionise motor insurance law? [Saamran: 1/11]

There are more private cars on Malaysia’s roads than there are Malaysians to drive them. In one consolidated judgment of eight appeals, the Federal Court in Sa’Amran rebuilt the law that governs what happens when one of them causes harm — and decided, point after point, that the victim comes first. This is the gateway to a ten-part series.

Read More