L v Road Accident Fund (21536/2013) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1182 (29 December 2016)

L v Road Accident Fund (21536/2013) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1182 (29 December 2016)

The court found that the plaintiff did not reach the 30% whole person impairment threshold but qualified for general damages under the narrative test due to permanent serious disfigurement and emotional trauma. Expert evidence established that her career options in nursing were somewhat curtailed, but no actual loss of income was demonstrated. The court accepted the actuary's approach of applying higher contingency deductions to account for future risks, including possible early retirement at age 57 due to the knee injury. The court awarded R200,000 in general damages and ordered the actuary to calculate the loss of income based on a 25% pre-morbid and 35% post-morbid contingency,...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 1182
Parties
Plaintiff: N M L; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 December 2016
Case Number
21536/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff awarded general damages and future loss of income to be calculated by actuary applying specified contingencies; defendant ordered to furnish undertaking for future medical costs.
Judges
Jansen
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, General Damages, Loss of Income, Expert Evidence, Contingency Deductions
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act General Damages Loss of Income 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

N M L

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff qualifies for general damages under the Road Accident Fund Act due to disfigurement and emotional trauma.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff suffered any future loss of income as a result of the accident.
  3. 3 What contingency deductions are appropriate given the plaintiff's circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff did not reach the 30% whole person impairment threshold but qualified for general damages under the narrative test due to permanent serious disfigurement and emotional trauma. Expert evidence established that her career options in nursing were somewhat curtailed, but no actual loss of income was demonstrated. The court accepted the actuary's approach of applying higher contingency deductions to account for future risks, including possible early retirement at age 57 due to the knee injury. The court awarded R200,000 in general damages and ordered the actuary to calculate the loss of income based on a 25% pre-morbid and 35% post-morbid contingency,...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff awarded general damages and future loss of income to be calculated by actuary applying specified contingencies; defendant ordered to furnish undertaking for future medical costs.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay 100% of plaintiff's proven or agreed damages.
  • Defendant to furnish plaintiff with an undertaking in terms of Section 17(4)(a) of Act 56 of 1996 for future medical costs within 20 days.