Barnard v Die Padongelukkefonds (3458/06) [2007] ZAECHC 58 (28 August 2007)

Barnard v Die Padongelukkefonds (3458/06) [2007] ZAECHC 58 (28 August 2007)

The court found that the insured driver was negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout for pedestrians and in executing an unlawful U-turn in contravention of traffic regulations. The plaintiff acted reasonably and could not have foreseen the insured driver's unlawful maneuver. There was no evidence of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, as she had checked both directions and the road was clear at the time she began crossing. The sole cause of the accident and resulting damages was the insured driver's negligence.

Citation
[2007] ZAECHC 58
Parties
Plaintiff: Natasha Barnard; Defendant: Die Padongelukkefonds
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 August 2007
Case Number
3458/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Separated From Quantum; Decision on Negligence Only
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff on the issue of negligence; costs reserved as agreed between the parties.
Judges
J C H Jansen
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Road Accident Fund, Pedestrian Liability
Delict Negligence Contributory Negligence Road Accident Fund Pedestrian Liability

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natasha Barnard

Plaintiff

Die Padongelukkefonds

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Separated From Quantum; Decision on Negligence Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the insured driver was negligent in causing the collision with the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in crossing the street.
  3. 3 Whether the insured driver's negligence was the sole cause of the plaintiff's damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the insured driver was negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout for pedestrians and in executing an unlawful U-turn in contravention of traffic regulations. The plaintiff acted reasonably and could not have foreseen the insured driver's unlawful maneuver. There was no evidence of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, as she had checked both directions and the road was clear at the time she began crossing. The sole cause of the accident and resulting damages was the insured driver's negligence.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff on the issue of negligence; costs reserved as agreed between the parties.

Orders

  • It is declared that the insured driver's negligence was the sole cause of the plaintiff's damages.
  • No finding of contributory negligence against the plaintiff.