M.A v Road Accident Fund (15323/2012) [2017] ZAWCHC 44 (5 April 2017)

M.A v Road Accident Fund (15323/2012) [2017] ZAWCHC 44 (5 April 2017)

The court found that the plaintiff suffered a severe and permanent brain injury with lasting neuropsychological deficits, but the evidence did not support total unemployability. The plaintiff was found capable of performing light, part-time secretarial work in a sympathetic environment until retirement age. The court rejected the assumption that the plaintiff would earn no income from 2018 onwards and directed that future injured income be calculated on the basis of half-day secretarial employment, with a 15 percent contingency deduction. The plaintiff's future uninjured income was to include a quarterly commission of R10,000 and a 10 percent annual bonus, with a 13 percent contingency...

Citation
[2017] ZAWCHC 44
Parties
Plaintiff: M A; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 April 2017
Case Number
15323/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Partial Settlement of Merits
Outcome
Interim order on quantum; final damages and costs reserved pending updated actuarial report.
Judges
Canca
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earning Capacity, Contingency Deductions, Medical Expert Evidence, Quantum of Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earning Capacity Contingency Deductions Medical Expert Evidence Quantum of Damages

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

Parties

M A

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Partial Settlement of Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What contingency factors should be applied to the plaintiff's past and future loss of earnings?
  2. 2 What assumptions should be used in calculating the plaintiff's future uninjured and injured income?
  3. 3 Is the plaintiff employable and, if so, in what capacity and for how long?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff suffered a severe and permanent brain injury with lasting neuropsychological deficits, but the evidence did not support total unemployability. The plaintiff was found capable of performing light, part-time secretarial work in a sympathetic environment until retirement age. The court rejected the assumption that the plaintiff would earn no income from 2018 onwards and directed that future injured income be calculated on the basis of half-day secretarial employment, with a 15 percent contingency deduction. The plaintiff's future uninjured income was to include a quarterly commission of R10,000 and a 10 percent annual bonus, with a 13 percent contingency...

Court Disposition

Interim order on quantum; final damages and costs reserved pending updated actuarial report.

Orders

  • Munro Forensic Actuaries to recalculate past and future loss of earnings in accordance with the court's directives.
  • Past uninjured income contingency factor confirmed at 5 percent.