G T obo E T v Road Accident Fund (A5072/18) [2019] ZAGPJHC 500 (27 November 2019)

G T obo E T v Road Accident Fund (A5072/18) [2019] ZAGPJHC 500 (27 November 2019)

The court found that the appellant discharged the onus of proving that E T is more vulnerable in the labour market due to the accident, as evidenced by expert reports and joint minutes confirming cognitive impairments that would not improve with psychotherapy. The respondent's concession limited its defence to a two-year delay in entering the employment market, but the joint minute of clinical psychologists established that the cognitive impairments are permanent and affect E T's ability to achieve his pre-accident academic level. The court accepted the actuarial calculation of damages, subject to contingency deductions and the agreed apportionment of liability, and set aside the trial...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 500
Parties
Appellant: G T obo E T; Respondent: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 November 2019
Case Number
A5072/18
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment; Full Bench Hearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; trial court's order set aside and replaced with an order in terms of the draft marked x as amended.
Judges
G Wright, M Mabesele, R Keightley
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earning Capacity, Quantification of Damages, Expert Evidence, Contingency Deductions
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earning Capacity Quantification of Damages Expert Evidence Contingency Deductions

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

Parties

G T obo E T

Appellant

Road Accident Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment; Full Bench Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant proved on a balance of probabilities that E T is more vulnerable in the labour market due to the accident.
  2. 2 How the increased vulnerability translates into a damages award for loss of future earning capacity.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court erred in absolving the defendant from the instance despite concessions on liability and quantum.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant discharged the onus of proving that E T is more vulnerable in the labour market due to the accident, as evidenced by expert reports and joint minutes confirming cognitive impairments that would not improve with psychotherapy. The respondent's concession limited its defence to a two-year delay in entering the employment market, but the joint minute of clinical psychologists established that the cognitive impairments are permanent and affect E T's ability to achieve his pre-accident academic level. The court accepted the actuarial calculation of damages, subject to contingency deductions and the agreed apportionment of liability, and set aside the trial...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; trial court's order set aside and replaced with an order in terms of the draft marked x as amended.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed with costs, including those of senior counsel where so employed.
  • The order of the trial court is set aside and replaced with an order in terms of the draft marked x as amended.