Coertzen v Road Accident Fund (21391/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 320 (4 July 2017)

Coertzen v Road Accident Fund (21391/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 320 (4 July 2017)

The court found that the insured driver failed to keep a proper lookout and turned right in the face of oncoming traffic, thereby bearing the greater responsibility for the collision. However, the plaintiff also had a duty to keep a proper lookout and could have taken evasive action had she observed the insured vehicle earlier. The evidence supported that the insured driver was primarily at fault, but the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. Accordingly, liability was apportioned, with the defendant held liable for 80% of the plaintiff's damages.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 320
Parties
Plaintiff: Ml Coertzen; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 July 2017
Case Number
21391/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Only; Quantum Postponed
Outcome
Defendant liable for 80% of plaintiff's agreed or proven damages; costs awarded to plaintiff; quantum postponed sine die.
Judges
Ranchod
Legal Topics
Motor Vehicle Collision, Contributory Negligence, Liability Apportionment
Delict Civil Procedure Motor Vehicle Collision Contributory Negligence Liability Apportionment

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ml Coertzen

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Only; Quantum Postponed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the insured driver was negligent in executing a right turn across the plaintiff's path.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout and avoid the collision.
  3. 3 How liability should be apportioned between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the insured driver failed to keep a proper lookout and turned right in the face of oncoming traffic, thereby bearing the greater responsibility for the collision. However, the plaintiff also had a duty to keep a proper lookout and could have taken evasive action had she observed the insured vehicle earlier. The evidence supported that the insured driver was primarily at fault, but the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. Accordingly, liability was apportioned, with the defendant held liable for 80% of the plaintiff's damages.

Court Disposition

Defendant liable for 80% of plaintiff's agreed or proven damages; costs awarded to plaintiff; quantum postponed sine die.

Orders

  • The defendant is liable for 80% of the plaintiff's agreed or proven damages.
  • The defendant is to pay the costs of the trial on the merits.