Barnard N.O obo Mncam v Road Accident Fund (1881/2012) [2019] ZAECPEHC 90 (22 August 2019)

Barnard N.O obo Mncam v Road Accident Fund (1881/2012) [2019] ZAECPEHC 90 (22 August 2019)

The court found that the necessity for the appointment of a curator to the patient’s estate was an unavoidable result of the injuries sustained in the collision, as the damages award created an estate requiring management by a curator. The defendant must take the victim as found, including psychological infirmities, and cannot avoid liability for increased costs resulting from such infirmities. The only reason the patient required a curator for his estate was the award resulting from the accident. If the costs of curatorship were not covered, the damages award would be diminished and would not constitute fair compensation. Therefore, the costs covered by the section 17(4)(a) certificate...

Citation
[2019] ZAECPEHC 90
Parties
Plaintiff: Nicola Barnard N.O. obo D Mncam; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 August 2019
Case Number
1881/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Judgment on Reserved Costs Issues After Settlement of Damages
Outcome
Costs covered by the section 17(4)(a) certificate include the reasonable costs of appointing a curator and the curator’s fees; defendant ordered to pay plaintiff’s costs of the hearing.
Judges
Ronaasen
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Curatorship Costs, Thin Skull Rule, Causation, Fair Compensation
Delict Road Accident Fund Act Curatorship Costs Thin Skull Rule Causation Fair Compensation

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicola Barnard N.O. obo D Mncam

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Judgment on Reserved Costs Issues After Settlement of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs covered by the section 17(4)(a) certificate include the costs of appointing a curator to the estate of the patient.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is liable for the curator's fees and related costs, given the patient's pre-existing mental disability.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the necessity for the appointment of a curator to the patient’s estate was an unavoidable result of the injuries sustained in the collision, as the damages award created an estate requiring management by a curator. The defendant must take the victim as found, including psychological infirmities, and cannot avoid liability for increased costs resulting from such infirmities. The only reason the patient required a curator for his estate was the award resulting from the accident. If the costs of curatorship were not covered, the damages award would be diminished and would not constitute fair compensation. Therefore, the costs covered by the section 17(4)(a) certificate...

Court Disposition

Costs covered by the section 17(4)(a) certificate include the reasonable costs of appointing a curator and the curator’s fees; defendant ordered to pay plaintiff’s costs of the hearing.

Orders

  • The costs covered by the certificate shall include 100% of the reasonable costs, on a party and party scale, in respect of the application for the appointment of a curator to the estate of the patient.
  • The costs covered by the certificate shall include 100% of the charges of the appointed curator to the estate of the patient, including costs incurred by the curator to furnish security for the due fulfilment of his functions as curator, if so directed by the court.