Fortune v Road Accident Fund (58893/2021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 185 (4 February 2025)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Liability Conceded

Legal Issues

1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum for the plaintiff's past and future loss of income resulting from the accident.
2. 2 Should the contingencies applied to the actuarial calculations be adjusted to reflect the plaintiff's prospects.
3. 3 Are the plaintiff's applications under Rule 38(2) and Rule 33(4) to be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff suffered significant injuries, primarily an L2 compression fracture, which materially affected her earning capacity. The actuarial calculations presented were accepted, but the court determined that higher contingencies of 25% and 35% should be applied to the uninjured and injured scenarios, respectively, to adequately reflect the plaintiff's prospects. The resulting figures for future loss of income were R4 507 684 (uninjured) and R3 878 282 (injured), with the nett award being R629 402. The claim for past loss of income, relating to missed weekend work, was quantified at R10 381. The plaintiff's applications under Rule 38(2) and Rule 33(4) were...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's applications granted; quantum of damages for past and future loss of income awarded; costs awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

• The plaintiff's application in terms of Rule 38(2) is granted.
• The plaintiff's application in terms of Rule 33(4) for separation of past hospital and medical expenses and general damages is granted; these aspects are postponed sine die.