Submission from insurance company faces objection
17 April, 2018, 12:00 am
STATE solicitor Bhavna Narayan yesterday objected to a submission that was made by Sun Insurance lawyer Julian Moti seeking for Section 31 of the Accident Compensation Act 2017 to be declared null and void.
During the strike out application hearing on Sun Insurance Company Ltd’s (SUN) motion to seek constitutional redress on the enactment of the Accident Compensation Act 2017, Ms Narayan said the plaintiff did not specify the above submission in their motion.
Ms Narayan stated that the plaintiff in their motion had sought a declaration that the repeal of the Motor Vehicle’s Compulsory Third Party Insurance (CTP) Act and Regulations contravened Section 26 (1) and (2) of the Constitution by aggravating the previous rights to equal rights, protection and benefit of the law.
She said Sun Insurance Ltd must stick to the redress they were seeking because they did not specify in their motion that Section 31 of the Accident Compensation Act 2017 must be declared null and void as it was unconstitutional.
Mr Moti had said the court had the power to make orders to either temporarily suspend the Accident Compensation Act or to order compensation for its client.
Fiji Court of Appeal judge Justice David Alfred responded and said if he was to rule in favour of what was being suggested by Mr Moti, then it would force the other four insurance companies to seek compensation.
The Fiji Court of Appeal will deliver its judgment on a notice of motion which was filed by the Attorney-General’s chambers to strike out Sun Insurance Company Ltd’s (SUN) motion to seek constitutional redress.