L.G v Road Accident Fund (33172017) [2020] ZAFSHC 89 (11 May 2020)

L.G v Road Accident Fund (33172017) [2020] ZAFSHC 89 (11 May 2020)

The court found that the plaintiff, as a BTech graduate in Civil Engineering, possessed a scarce skill and would likely have progressed to Paterson level D5 as her career ceiling. The opinion of Ms Van Jaarsveldt was preferred over Ms Kheswa, who failed to motivate her lower ceiling assessment. The plaintiff remains employable but with narrowed career options and physical limitations requiring reasonable accommodation. The court determined that the normal contingency should apply to pre-morbid earnings and a total contingency of 30% to future loss of earnings. Compensation was awarded accordingly, based on the actuarial calculations using the D5 scenario.

Citation
[2020] ZAFSHC 89
Parties
Plaintiff: L G; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 May 2020
Case Number
33172017
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantification of Damages After Liability Settled
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for loss of earnings is upheld; damages awarded as quantified.
Judges
P.E. Molitsoane
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earnings, Contingencies, Future Loss of Earning Capacity
Delict Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earnings Contingencies Future Loss of Earning Capacity

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L G

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantification of Damages After Liability Settled

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate contingency to apply to the plaintiff's past and future loss of earnings?
  2. 2 Should the plaintiff's career ceiling be calculated at Paterson level D1/D2 or D5?
  3. 3 Is the plaintiff entitled to compensation for loss of earnings based on her post-accident employability and physical limitations?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff, as a BTech graduate in Civil Engineering, possessed a scarce skill and would likely have progressed to Paterson level D5 as her career ceiling. The opinion of Ms Van Jaarsveldt was preferred over Ms Kheswa, who failed to motivate her lower ceiling assessment. The plaintiff remains employable but with narrowed career options and physical limitations requiring reasonable accommodation. The court determined that the normal contingency should apply to pre-morbid earnings and a total contingency of 30% to future loss of earnings. Compensation was awarded accordingly, based on the actuarial calculations using the D5 scenario.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for loss of earnings is upheld; damages awarded as quantified.

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff the total amount of R1,574,726.43, comprising R130,690.70 for past loss of earnings and R1,423,565.50 for future loss of earnings.
  • Defendant shall provide the plaintiff with an undertaking in terms of Section 17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996 for 70% of the costs of future accommodation, treatment, or services arising from the injuries sustained in the motor vehicle collision on 14 May 2013, after such costs have been incurred...