Benjamin v De Beer (476/93) [1997] ZASCA 49 (27 May 1997)

Benjamin v De Beer (476/93) [1997] ZASCA 49 (27 May 1997)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court's award of damages was not shown to be incorrect under any of the contested heads. The respondent's choice of private clinic for future medical treatment was reasonable given her prior negative experience at the public hospital and the availability of her preferred surgeon only at the private institution. The number of psychotherapy treatments awarded was supported by evidence and prior agreement between the parties. The respondent's earnings were properly determined based on her testimony and employer certification, and the actuarial calculation used was not disputed at trial. The disability pension received by the respondent was not...

Citation
[1997] ZASCA 49
Parties
Appellant: Dr H Benjamin; Respondent: Veronica De Beer
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 May 1997
Case Number
476/93
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Quantum of Damages
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs due to respondent's absence.
Judges
E M Grosskopf, Vivier, F H Grosskopf, Harms, Plewmann
Legal Topics
Medical Negligence, Quantum of Damages, Loss of Earnings, Future Medical Expenses, Contingency Deductions
Delict Medical Negligence Quantum of Damages Loss of Earnings Future Medical Expenses Contingency Deductions

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr H Benjamin

Appellant

Veronica De Beer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Quantum of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court's award of damages was correctly assessed under each head of claim.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was entitled to claim the cost of future medical treatment at a private clinic rather than a public hospital.
  3. 3 Whether the number of psychotherapy treatments awarded was reasonable.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court's award of damages was not shown to be incorrect under any of the contested heads. The respondent's choice of private clinic for future medical treatment was reasonable given her prior negative experience at the public hospital and the availability of her preferred surgeon only at the private institution. The number of psychotherapy treatments awarded was supported by evidence and prior agreement between the parties. The respondent's earnings were properly determined based on her testimony and employer certification, and the actuarial calculation used was not disputed at trial. The disability pension received by the respondent was not...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs due to respondent's absence.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs is made.