Labuschagne and Others v Lourens (34135/2012) [2014] ZAWCHC 219 (29 August 2014)

Labuschagne and Others v Lourens (34135/2012) [2014] ZAWCHC 219 (29 August 2014)

The court held that the third plaintiff, as the driver involved in the accident, qualifies as a 'third party' under section 17 of the Road Accident Fund Act. Section 21(1) abolishes common law claims against the owner or driver of a motor vehicle for compensation resulting from bodily injury or death. Section 21(2)(b) creates an exception for emotional shock claims, but only for persons other than a third party. Since the third plaintiff is a third party, his claim against the defendant is excluded by section 21(2)(b) and must be made against the Road Accident Fund. The fact that the Fund may not be liable under section 19 does not revive a common law claim. The third plaintiff's...

Citation
[2014] ZAWCHC 219
Parties
Plaintiff: Labuschagne, JL; Plaintiff: Labuschagne, GJ; Plaintiff: Labuschagne, M; Defendant: Lourens
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 August 2014
Case Number
34135/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Determination in Limine
Outcome
The third plaintiff's claim against the defendant is excluded by section 21(2)(b) of the Road Accident Fund Act and is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Wepener
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Abolition of Common Law Claims, Emotional Shock, Third Party Definition
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Abolition of Common Law Claims Emotional Shock Third Party Definition

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Labuschagne, JL

Plaintiff

Labuschagne, GJ

Plaintiff

Labuschagne, M

Plaintiff

Lourens

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Determination in Limine

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third plaintiff's claim for emotional shock and trauma against the defendant is excluded by section 21(2)(b) of the Road Accident Fund Act.
  2. 2 Whether the third plaintiff qualifies as a 'third party' under the RAF Act and is precluded from claiming against the common law wrongdoer.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the third plaintiff, as the driver involved in the accident, qualifies as a 'third party' under section 17 of the Road Accident Fund Act. Section 21(1) abolishes common law claims against the owner or driver of a motor vehicle for compensation resulting from bodily injury or death. Section 21(2)(b) creates an exception for emotional shock claims, but only for persons other than a third party. Since the third plaintiff is a third party, his claim against the defendant is excluded by section 21(2)(b) and must be made against the Road Accident Fund. The fact that the Fund may not be liable under section 19 does not revive a common law claim. The third plaintiff's...

Court Disposition

The third plaintiff's claim against the defendant is excluded by section 21(2)(b) of the Road Accident Fund Act and is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The third plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed with costs.