Kunene v Road Accident Fund (23049/2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 93 (28 May 2015)

Kunene v Road Accident Fund (23049/2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 93 (28 May 2015)

The court found that the plaintiff sustained moderately severe head injuries and physical sequelae that significantly impaired his earning capacity and quality of life. Expert evidence established that, while the plaintiff is not totally unemployable, his ability to perform skilled work such as tiling is substantially compromised and he requires constant supervision. The court rejected the defendant's proposed 45% contingency deduction for future loss of earnings, finding it unjustified in the absence of supporting evidence, and instead applied a 20% deduction. The quantum for general damages was set at R850,000, reflecting the severity of the injuries but acknowledging the plaintiff's...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPJHC 93
Parties
Plaintiff: Kunene Nandos; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 May 2015
Case Number
23049/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum and Damages Determination After Partial Settlement of Liability
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff; damages and costs awarded subject to liability apportionment.
Judges
M A Makume
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Personal Injury, Loss of Earning Capacity, General Damages, Contingency Deductions
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Personal Injury Loss of Earning Capacity General Damages 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kunene Nandos

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum and Damages Determination After Partial Settlement of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum for general damages arising from the plaintiff's injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.
  2. 2 What is the proper calculation for the plaintiff's future loss of earning capacity, considering his neuropsychological and physical sequelae.
  3. 3 Should the contingency deduction applied to future loss of earnings be 45% or a lower percentage.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff sustained moderately severe head injuries and physical sequelae that significantly impaired his earning capacity and quality of life. Expert evidence established that, while the plaintiff is not totally unemployable, his ability to perform skilled work such as tiling is substantially compromised and he requires constant supervision. The court rejected the defendant's proposed 45% contingency deduction for future loss of earnings, finding it unjustified in the absence of supporting evidence, and instead applied a 20% deduction. The quantum for general damages was set at R850,000, reflecting the severity of the injuries but acknowledging the plaintiff's...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff; damages and costs awarded subject to liability apportionment.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff R1,872,645, comprising R850,000 for general damages, R120,800 for accrued loss, and R901,845 for future loss of income.
  • The defendant is ordered to furnish the plaintiff with a certificate in terms of section 17(4)(a) of Act 56 of 1996 to cover future medical expenses.