BRIEF FACTS:

• On 23^rd of December 2022, a road traffic accident occurred involving a motor car and a motorcycle.
  
  
• The motor car was owned by the 1^st Defendant (“Mohd Khairul”) and was being driven by the 2^nd Defendant (“Nurul Azera”) while the motorcycle was being ridden by the 3^rd Defendant (“Mohamad Afiq”).
  
  
• On the same day of the accident, Mohd Khairul had purchased an takaful certificate/insurance policy from the Plaintiff (“Etiqa”) for his motor car.
  
  
• The certificate/policy was issued at 3.49PM on the 23^rd of December 2022 and the period of coverage is from 23^rd of December 2022 to 22^nd December 2023.
  
  
• On 27^th of December 2022, Mohamad Afiq lodged a police report stating that an accident had occurred on 23^rd of December 2022 at around 3.45PM.
  
  
• On the same day, Nurul Azera had made a correction to her previous police report to amend the time of the accident to 2.47PM.
  
  
• Etiqa appointed an adjuster to investigate the circumstance of the accident and the findings showed two different time stamps from the evidence given by Nurul Azera and Mohamad Afiq.
  
  
• Etiqa sought a declaration from the Court stating that Etiqa should not be responsible for any claims made by Mohamad Afiq against Nurul Azera and Mohd Khairul as the takaful certificate/insurance policy was purchased after the accident had already happened.
  
  
• Etiqa contends that the takaful certificate/insurance policy only became effective from the specified time it was issued on the date of accident, meaning it does not cover the accident that occurred earlier that day.
  
  
• Etiqa further states that Mohd Khairul did not inform them about the accident when purchasing the certificate/policy which makes the certificate/policy invalid for the claim.
  
  
• Mohamed Afiq, however, contends that if there is no specific time mentioned in the Certificate/Policy, then the Certificate/ Policy will take effect from midnight on the start date regardless of when it was purchased.

THE DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT (HC)

• The HC highlighted that insurance documents must be read as a whole.
  
  
• Since the certificate/policy clearly stated it was issued at 3:49 PM on 23^rd of December 2022, the coverage commences at the stated time of issuance.
  
  
• The HC took into account that evidences from both Nurul Azera and Mohamed Afiq which established that the accident happened before the certificate/policy was issued. Therefore, the accident fell outside the period of coverage.
  
  
• The HC was of the view that it would be unreasonable to expect Etiqa to enquire from Mohd Khairul whether he had been in an accident before issuing the certificate/policy.
  
  
• It was Mohd Khairul’s responsibility to disclose such information.
  
  
• As such, the HC ruled that Etiqa shall not be liable for any claims arising from Mohamed Afiq against Nurul Azera and Mohd Khairul.