James Dick v MVIT

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Woods J
• Judgment Date: 17 August 1993
• Citation: [1993] PNGLR 443
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1993
• Judgement Number: N1169

National Court: Woods J

Judgment Delivered: 17 August 1993

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

JAMES DICK

V

MOTOR VEHICLES INSURANCE (PNG) TRUST

Mount Hagen

Woods J

19 July 1993

17 August 1993

INSURANCE — Limitation of actions — Notice of intended action — Personal injuries — Motor vehicle accident — Notice to Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust — Application for extension of time — Discretion of court — Exercise of discretion.

Facts

The defendant has made an application to dismiss the plaintiff's action on the basis that the requirements for notice under s 54 (6) (b) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act Ch 295 have not been complied with. The plaintiff was injured in an accident on 15 November 1987. He applied to the Insurance Commissioner for an extension of time in which to lodge a claim with the insurance Trust on 13 October 1988. A copy was sent to the trust. The trust denied liability. The Insurance Commissioner on 9 November 1988 granted an extension of time of 28 days from the date of his letter. The plaintiff failed to give notice within the time limit, but then filed a writ in January 1991. The plaintiff is submitting that his letter of 13 October is sufficient notice and compliance and that the trust, by denying liability, is estopped from denying acceptance of notice.

Held

1. If a notice letter is sent to the Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust after six months after the accident, and before an extension is granted by the Insurance Commissioner, it is a nullity.

2. Under s 54 (1) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act Ch 295, notice of intention to make a claim is mandatory.

3. The words "give notice within the extended time" in s 54 (6) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act provide that such notice must be given within the time allowed, and it does not suggest that an earlier void notice can be reinstated.

4. Even where the prior invalid notice is a writ, any subsequent grant of extension of time/approval cannot validate the writ.

5. A valid notice of intention to claim against the Motor Vehicles Insurance (PNG) Trust is a condition precedent to an action against the trust.

Cases Cited

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

Pupu v Motor Vehicles Insurance...