D.A.R obo B.R v Road Accident Fund (394/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 366 (26 September 2023)

D.A.R obo B.R v Road Accident Fund (394/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 366 (26 September 2023)

The court found that the defendant had conceded liability and allowed the plaintiff to adduce expert evidence by affidavit under Rule 38(2), without cross-examination or rebuttal. The expert evidence established that the minor child sustained moderate traumatic brain injury, resulting in significant neurocognitive and neuropsychological deficits. While the defendant argued the child was not unemployable, the court held that the evidence supported a finding that the child would only be able to obtain vocational training and seek sheltered employment, with limited prospects in the open labour market. The court rejected the defendant's attempt to introduce evidence in the heads of argument...

Citation
[2023] ZAFSHC 366
Parties
Plaintiff: D.A.R obo B.R; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 September 2023
Case Number
394/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for loss of earnings is upheld; damages awarded as calculated.
Judges
P E Molitsoane
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earnings, Expert Evidence, Contingency Deductions, Rule 38 Affidavit Evidence
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earnings Expert Evidence Contingency Deductions Rule 38 Affidavit Evidence

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.A.R obo B.R

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the minor child suffered a loss of earning capacity as a result of injuries sustained in the motor vehicle accident.
  2. 2 What contingency deductions are appropriate in calculating future loss of earnings.
  3. 3 Whether the expert evidence admitted by affidavit is conclusive in the absence of rebuttal evidence from the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant had conceded liability and allowed the plaintiff to adduce expert evidence by affidavit under Rule 38(2), without cross-examination or rebuttal. The expert evidence established that the minor child sustained moderate traumatic brain injury, resulting in significant neurocognitive and neuropsychological deficits. While the defendant argued the child was not unemployable, the court held that the evidence supported a finding that the child would only be able to obtain vocational training and seek sheltered employment, with limited prospects in the open labour market. The court rejected the defendant's attempt to introduce evidence in the heads of argument...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for loss of earnings is upheld; damages awarded as calculated.

Orders

  • The Defendant is to pay the Plaintiff the sum of R3,831,735.00 in respect of the claim for loss of income.
  • Payment is to be made into the trust account of Mokoduo, Erasmus, and Davidson Attorneys for the benefit of the Minor within 180 days from the date of this order.