Heese N.O v Road Accident Fund (2) (A586/2012, WCHC10009/2004) [2014] ZAWCHC 2 (28 January 2014)

Heese N.O v Road Accident Fund (2) (A586/2012, WCHC10009/2004) [2014] ZAWCHC 2 (28 January 2014)

The court held that the trial court's order should be varied to reflect the appellant's success on claims for general damages and medical expenses, which were settled prior to or during trial. The costs order must include expert costs related to those claims, but exclude costs associated with the unsuccessful claim for loss of earning capacity. The court found that, in the absence of a specific request for judgment by the respondent, the proper order regarding the failed claim for loss of earning capacity was dismissal rather than judgment in favour of the RAF, in line with established practice. The claim for the appointment of a curator bonis was postponed for later determination by...

Citation
[2014] ZAWCHC 2
Parties
Appellant: Adv AE Heese N.O. (in her capacity as curator ad litem to Ulrich Hans Peters); Respondent: Road Accident Fund
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 January 2014
Case Number
A586/2012, WCHC10009/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supplementary Judgment After Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, but trial court's order varied to reflect success on settled claims and proper allocation of costs.
Judges
Veldhuizen, Rogers, Schippers
Legal Topics
Costs Award, Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earning Capacity, Absolution From Instance, Expert Evidence
Civil Procedure Delict Costs Award Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earning Capacity Absolution From Instance Expert 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adv AE Heese N.O. (in her capacity as curator ad litem to Ulrich Hans Peters)

Appellant

Road Accident Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supplementary Judgment After Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order should be varied to account for amounts paid or tendered by the respondent after summons was issued.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court's order granting judgment in favour of the RAF should be varied to mere dismissal of the claim for loss of earning capacity.
  3. 3 Extent of costs entitlement for the appellant regarding settled claims prior to or during trial.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the trial court's order should be varied to reflect the appellant's success on claims for general damages and medical expenses, which were settled prior to or during trial. The costs order must include expert costs related to those claims, but exclude costs associated with the unsuccessful claim for loss of earning capacity. The court found that, in the absence of a specific request for judgment by the respondent, the proper order regarding the failed claim for loss of earning capacity was dismissal rather than judgment in favour of the RAF, in line with established practice. The claim for the appointment of a curator bonis was postponed for later determination by...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, but trial court's order varied to reflect success on settled claims and proper allocation of costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The order made by Blignaut J on 2 December 2011 is set aside and replaced with a revised order specifying dismissal of the claim for loss of earning capacity with costs, including trial costs except for the defendant's expert witness.