A.A S obo C.M.M. S v MEC For Health, Gauteng (Reasons) [2023] ZAGPPHC 184; 13531/2018 (7 March 2023)

A.A S obo C.M.M. S v MEC For Health, Gauteng (Reasons) [2023] ZAGPPHC 184; 13531/2018 (7 March 2023)

The court found that, although it was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the award of general damages, the existence of conflicting judgments on the treatment of general damages in cases of serious brain injury constitutes a compelling reason for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act. Therefore, leave to appeal is granted to the applicant, but only in respect of the general damages portion of the order. The remainder of the award is not suspended and must be complied with.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 184
Parties
Respondent: A.A S obo C.M.M. S; Applicant: MEC For Health, Gauteng
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 March 2023
Case Number
13531/2018
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal on the issue of general damages only; the remainder of the award remains enforceable.
Judges
N.N Bam
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, General Damages, Serious Brain Injury, Conflicting Judgments
Civil Procedure Delict Leave to Appeal General Damages Serious Brain Injury Conflicting Judgments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A.A S obo C.M.M. S

Respondent

MEC For Health, Gauteng

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court erred in awarding general damages of R2.2 million to the minor child instead of R500,000.
  2. 2 Whether conflicting judgments on general damages in serious brain injury cases justify leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although it was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the award of general damages, the existence of conflicting judgments on the treatment of general damages in cases of serious brain injury constitutes a compelling reason for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act. Therefore, leave to appeal is granted to the applicant, but only in respect of the general damages portion of the order. The remainder of the award is not suspended and must be complied with.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal on the issue of general damages only; the remainder of the award remains enforceable.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the defendant to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal only against the part of the order relating to general damages in the amount of R2,200,000.00.
  • The balance in the amount of R13,330,576.28 is not suspended and shall be complied with as per the order granted on 12 October 2022.