A magistrate’s court has warned that insurance companies should not use court proceedings to prolong road accident claims, or pressure accident victims into accepting lower compensation, New Straits Times has reported.
Sessions Court judge Saifullah Bhatti said that courts must prevent the judicial process from being abused, especially when defendants had no genuine defence against accident claims, adding that prolonged litigation could financially exhaust accident victims or make pursuing compensation no longer worthwhile.
“Courts must not allow an abuse of the judicial process, including situations where insurance companies, in particular, use the judicial process to drag the suit either to tire the plaintiff into settling for less or increase costs to the point that pursuing the claim no longer benefits the plaintiff,” he said in a written grounds of judgement published on the Judiciary Department’s website.
Transport company 3S Teguh Transport Sdn Bhd and its driver, Daniel Savarimuthu was ordered by Saifullah to pay RM43,605.10 in damages to businessman Kathirrevan Suppiah, whose lorry overturned after colliding with a detached tyre on the North-South Expressway, the report wrote.
The defendants were also ordered to pay RM11,000 in legal costs, a sum that is more than double the RM5,300 provided under the amended scale of costs. The higher costs were justified as the defendants has unnecessarily prolonged the case, despite having no credible evidence to challenge the claim, the judge said.
“Right from the pleadings to the trial of the action, the defendants had no real defence to the action, and in my assessment, the entire trial process was conducted merely to either stall the defendants’ payout of the claim or to oppress the plaintiff into perhaps abandoning the claim,” he said.
The lawsuit was filed by Kathirrevan following an accident at KM412.8 of the southbound North-South Expressway on July 31, 2024. His lorry, driven by his employee, collided with a tyre that had detached from the defendants’ lorry that was parked in the emergency lane.
The collision caused Kathirrevan’s lorry to overturn, resulting in damage sustained by the lorry and its cargo. The court found the defendants fully liable for the accident after rejecting their argument that the lorry driver had contributed to the collision.
Saifullah said that accident claims should generally be settled without a full trial unless there were genuine disputes over liability or compensation, and added that nsurance companies had considerable financial and legal resources, including internal executives, panel lawyers and adjusters, placing ordinary claimants at a disadvantage.
Imposing higher costs in such circumstances would serve as a deterrent against unnecessary litigation and help protect weaker parties, Saifullah said. Road traffic legislation was intended to protect accident victims and legitimate compensation claims should be resolved promptly without excessive legal costs, he said.
