Cawood and Others v Road Accident Fund (27980/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 766 (12 October 2022)

Cawood and Others v Road Accident Fund (27980/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 766 (12 October 2022)

The court found that the Road Accident Fund's imposition of an internal block on payments to the fifth applicant was unlawful and amounted to self-help, which is impermissible under South African law. The Fund lacked statutory authority under Section 4 of the Road Accident Fund Act to impose such a block, as confirmed by previous full court decisions. The court held that the matter was appropriately heard on an urgent basis due to the ongoing illegality and the absence of any lawful justification for the Fund's conduct. The applicants were entitled to relief, and the respondent's persistence in maintaining the block and opposing the application warranted a punitive costs order on an...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 766
Parties
Applicant: Adv Cawood & 4 Others; Respondent: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 October 2022
Case Number
27980/2022
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; decision to impose internal block reviewed and set aside; block uplifted; costs awarded on attorney and client scale.
Judges
Moshoana
Legal Topics
Self Help Remedies, Internal Block on Payments, Review of Administrative Action, Attorney and Client Costs
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Self Help Remedies Internal Block on Payments Review of Administrative Action Attorney and Client Costs

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adv Cawood & 4 Others

Applicant

Road Accident Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was entitled to impose an internal block on payments to the fifth applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the application should be heard on an urgent basis.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's conduct justified a punitive costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Road Accident Fund's imposition of an internal block on payments to the fifth applicant was unlawful and amounted to self-help, which is impermissible under South African law. The Fund lacked statutory authority under Section 4 of the Road Accident Fund Act to impose such a block, as confirmed by previous full court decisions. The court held that the matter was appropriately heard on an urgent basis due to the ongoing illegality and the absence of any lawful justification for the Fund's conduct. The applicants were entitled to relief, and the respondent's persistence in maintaining the block and opposing the application warranted a punitive costs order on an...

Court Disposition

Application granted; decision to impose internal block reviewed and set aside; block uplifted; costs awarded on attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The decision of the respondent to impose an internal block on payments to the fifth respondent is reviewed and set aside.
  • The internal block by the respondent on payments to the fifth applicant is uplifted.