Makhubela v Road Accident Fund (2011/30124) [2025] ZAGPJHC 18 (16 January 2025)

Makhubela v Road Accident Fund (2011/30124) [2025] ZAGPJHC 18 (16 January 2025)

The court found that the claim under case number 2011/30124 had been settled in its entirety by the order of Wright J on 5 September 2014, which granted the plaintiff 100% of her damages and an undertaking for future medical expenses. The subsequent application for default judgment was therefore incompetent, as the claim had already been extinguished by settlement. The conduct of the plaintiff's attorney and counsel, in failing to disclose the prior settlement and proceedings, was found to be improper and warranted referral to the Legal Practice Council for further scrutiny.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 18
Parties
Plaintiff: Makhubela Tsundukani Alicia; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 January 2025
Case Number
2011/30124
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Application for Default Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; matter previously settled in full.
Judges
Weideman
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreement, Road Accident Fund Act, Default Judgment, Curatrix Ad Litem, Professional Conduct
Civil Procedure Delict Settlement Agreement Road Accident Fund Act Default Judgment Curatrix Ad Litem Professional Conduct

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

Parties

Makhubela Tsundukani Alicia

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Application for Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim under case number 2011/30124 was already settled in full by the order of Wright J on 5 September 2014.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's application for default judgment is competent in light of the prior settlement.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the plaintiff's attorney and counsel meets the required standard of candour to the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claim under case number 2011/30124 had been settled in its entirety by the order of Wright J on 5 September 2014, which granted the plaintiff 100% of her damages and an undertaking for future medical expenses. The subsequent application for default judgment was therefore incompetent, as the claim had already been extinguished by settlement. The conduct of the plaintiff's attorney and counsel, in failing to disclose the prior settlement and proceedings, was found to be improper and warranted referral to the Legal Practice Council for further scrutiny.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; matter previously settled in full.

Orders

  • The claim under case number 2011/30124 was settled in its totality on 5 September 2014.
  • The application for default judgment is dismissed as it relates to a claim that had already been extinguished by way of settlement.