In the Matter of s54(6) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act (Ch295); Application of Jack Lucas Kuri

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Woods J
• Judgment Date: 18 August 1992
• Citation: [1992] PNGLR 448
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1992
• Judgement Number: N1107

National Court: Woods J

Judgment Delivered: 18 August 1992

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 54 (6) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES (THIRD PARTY INSURANCE) ACT CH 295;

APPLICATION OF JACK LUCAS KURI

Mount Hagen

Woods J

18 August 1992

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS — Limitation of action — Notice of intended action to Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust — Personal injuries — Motor vehicle accident.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — Application for extension of time — Sufficiency of cause — Principles in exercising discretion.

Facts

The applicant, who suffered injuries from a motor vehicle accident, applied for an extension of time within which to make a claim against the Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust pursuant to s 54 (6) (b) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act Ch 295. The time limitation for giving of notice of intention to make a claim against the insurance trust was 6 months from the date of the accident. The applicant was, however, 1 month out of time.

Held

1. The notice of intention to make a claim against the Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust must be made within 6 months of the accident.

2. Section 54 (6) (b) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act Ch 295 requires that sufficient cause must be shown before an extension of time may be granted. The power to grant an extension of time is a discretionary one, to be exercised according to proper principles and taking into account all the circumstances of the case. (Adopted and applied Rundle v Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust [1988] PNGLR 20.)

3. Although the applicant was only 1 month late, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, the application for extension of time was refused. The following circumstances were taken into account: (1) the applicant has failed to show a prima facie case against a particular vehicle; (2) on the material before the Court, there was confusion over the identity of the vehicles, (3) there was no police road accident report, and (4) the medical report did not relate the injuries to the accident.

Cases Cited

Application of Sir Kepa Pupu (1992) unreported N1077.

Rundle v Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust [1988] PNGLR 20.

Counsel

P Dowa, for the plaintiff.

A Kandakasi, for the defendant.

18 August 1992

WOODS J: This is an application for an extension of time under...