Guardian National Insurance Company Ltd. v Bennie (589/1989) [1992] ZASCA 24 (13 March 1992)

Guardian National Insurance Company Ltd. v Bennie (589/1989) [1992] ZASCA 24 (13 March 1992)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court had, in most respects, properly exercised its discretion in assessing damages for the respondent's paraplegic injuries. However, the court held that certain awards were excessive or not sufficiently justified by the evidence. Specifically, the contingency deduction for future loss of earnings should have been increased to account for the realistic possibility of earlier retirement. The cost of replacing the bath hoist was reduced due to infrequent use, and the skin care award was lowered based on expert testimony regarding actual annual costs. The court also found that the respondent did not reasonably require two servants' rooms or...

Citation
[1992] ZASCA 24
Parties
Appellant: Guardian National Insurance Company Limited; Respondent: Mary Smith Bennie
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 March 1992
Case Number
589/1989
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court on Quantum of Damages
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs. The total damages awarded to the respondent are reduced.
Judges
Van Heerden, Van den Heever, Howie
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Loss of Earning Capacity, Future Medical Expenses, Cost of Accommodation, Contingency Deductions, Paraplegic Injury
Delict Quantum of Damages Loss of Earning Capacity Future Medical Expenses Cost of Accommodation Contingency Deductions Paraplegic Injury

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

Parties

Guardian National Insurance Company Limited

Appellant

Mary Smith Bennie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court on Quantum of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in its assessment of damages under various heads following the respondent's paraplegic injury.
  2. 2 Whether the contingency deduction for future loss of earnings was appropriate.
  3. 3 Whether the costs awarded for domestic assistance, bath hoist, psychotherapy, skin care, living accommodation, and air-conditioning were justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court had, in most respects, properly exercised its discretion in assessing damages for the respondent's paraplegic injuries. However, the court held that certain awards were excessive or not sufficiently justified by the evidence. Specifically, the contingency deduction for future loss of earnings should have been increased to account for the realistic possibility of earlier retirement. The cost of replacing the bath hoist was reduced due to infrequent use, and the skin care award was lowered based on expert testimony regarding actual annual costs. The court also found that the respondent did not reasonably require two servants' rooms or...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs. The total damages awarded to the respondent are reduced.

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the order of the court a quo is altered to read: 'The sum of R1 175 798,71.'
  • The appellant is awarded costs of appeal.