De Sousa v Subtropico Market Agents (Pty) Ltd (49152/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1050 (22 December 2016)

De Sousa v Subtropico Market Agents (Pty) Ltd (49152/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1050 (22 December 2016)

The court found that the plaintiff was walking in an area designated for pedestrians and that the forklift driver drove with his vision obstructed by a high load of banana crates, which prevented him from seeing the plaintiff. The driver failed to act reasonably by not reversing the forklift as required by general driving rules when his view was obstructed. The plaintiff was a credible and reliable witness, and there was no evidence of negligence on her part. The video evidence supported the plaintiff's version that she was struck from behind while walking straight down the aisle. The defendant failed to prove any contributory negligence. The sole cause of the incident was the negligence...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 1050
Parties
Plaintiff: Natividade Orlanda De Sousa; Defendant: Subtropico Market Agents (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 December 2016
Case Number
49152/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Merits Determined, Quantum Postponed Sine Die
Outcome
Defendant found liable for 100% of the plaintiff's proven or agreed damages; costs awarded to plaintiff; quantum postponed sine die.
Judges
D S Molefe
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Onus of Proof, Apportionment of Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Negligence Contributory Negligence Onus of Proof Apportionment of Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natividade Orlanda De Sousa

Plaintiff

Subtropico Market Agents (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Merits Determined, Quantum Postponed Sine Die

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the forklift driver was negligent and caused the collision with the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is liable for the plaintiff's damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was walking in an area designated for pedestrians and that the forklift driver drove with his vision obstructed by a high load of banana crates, which prevented him from seeing the plaintiff. The driver failed to act reasonably by not reversing the forklift as required by general driving rules when his view was obstructed. The plaintiff was a credible and reliable witness, and there was no evidence of negligence on her part. The video evidence supported the plaintiff's version that she was struck from behind while walking straight down the aisle. The defendant failed to prove any contributory negligence. The sole cause of the incident was the negligence...

Court Disposition

Defendant found liable for 100% of the plaintiff's proven or agreed damages; costs awarded to plaintiff; quantum postponed sine die.

Orders

  • The defendant is liable for 100% of the proven or agreed damages.
  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff's costs of the action insofar as it pertains to liability, including the costs of Senior Counsel and the costs of the trial from 31 October 2016 to 2 November 2016.