Henwells Transport (Edms) Bpk v Vervoer (232/82) [1984] ZASCA 64 (29 May 1984)

Henwells Transport (Edms) Bpk v Vervoer (232/82) [1984] ZASCA 64 (29 May 1984)

The appellate court found that the probabilities favoured the respondent's version: the appellant's vehicle was stationary in the left lane of the Warmbad-Pretoria road without lights, constituting a dangerous obstruction. The evidence of independent witnesses supported this finding. The appellant's driver, Mofokeng, created the hazardous situation by stopping his vehicle in the lane at night, which amounted to negligence and was the sole cause of the collision. There was no credible evidence of contributory negligence by the respondent's driver, Modiba, who acted reasonably under the circumstances and could not have avoided the collision. The trial court's dismissal of the appellant's...

Citation
[1984] ZASCA 64
Parties
Appellant: Henwells Transport (Edms) Bpk; Respondent: Vervoer
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 1984
Case Number
232/82
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Jansen, Joubert, Hefer
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Motor Vehicle Collision, Burden of Proof
Delict Civil Procedure Negligence Contributory Negligence Motor Vehicle Collision Burden of Proof

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

Parties

Henwells Transport (Edms) Bpk

Appellant

Vervoer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's driver was negligent and caused the collision.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's driver was contributorily negligent.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly dismissed the appellant's claim and upheld the respondent's counterclaim.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court found that the probabilities favoured the respondent's version: the appellant's vehicle was stationary in the left lane of the Warmbad-Pretoria road without lights, constituting a dangerous obstruction. The evidence of independent witnesses supported this finding. The appellant's driver, Mofokeng, created the hazardous situation by stopping his vehicle in the lane at night, which amounted to negligence and was the sole cause of the collision. There was no credible evidence of contributory negligence by the respondent's driver, Modiba, who acted reasonably under the circumstances and could not have avoided the collision. The trial court's dismissal of the appellant's...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The trial court's order in favour of the respondent for damages in the amount of R38,896.71 with costs stands.