Mashilo v Road Accident Fund (164/24) [2025] ZAMPMHC 38 (12 August 2025)

Mashilo v Road Accident Fund (164/24) [2025] ZAMPMHC 38 (12 August 2025)

The court found that the plaintiff had established negligence on the part of the insured driver and that the defendant was liable for damages resulting from the accident. Expert evidence was admitted on affidavit without objection, and the plaintiff's claims for loss of future income and future medical expenses were substantiated by expert and actuarial reports. The court applied a contingency deduction of 25% to the loss of earnings, awarding R440,758.00. The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate general damages, as the RAF had not assessed the seriousness of the plaintiff's injuries in accordance with the regulations. The issue of general damages was postponed sine die.

Citation
[2025] ZAMPMHC 38
Parties
Plaintiff: Tays Mandla Mashilo; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 August 2025
Case Number
164/24
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for loss of future income and future medical expenses is granted; issue of general damages is postponed sine die.
Judges
J T Leso
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earning Capacity, Future Medical Expenses, Expert Evidence on Affidavit, Jurisdiction General Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earning Capacity Future Medical Expenses Expert Evidence on Affidavit Jurisdiction General 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tays Mandla Mashilo

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the motor vehicle accident.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to compensation for loss of future income and future medical expenses.
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue of general damages in the absence of RAF's assessment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had established negligence on the part of the insured driver and that the defendant was liable for damages resulting from the accident. Expert evidence was admitted on affidavit without objection, and the plaintiff's claims for loss of future income and future medical expenses were substantiated by expert and actuarial reports. The court applied a contingency deduction of 25% to the loss of earnings, awarding R440,758.00. The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate general damages, as the RAF had not assessed the seriousness of the plaintiff's injuries in accordance with the regulations. The issue of general damages was postponed sine die.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for loss of future income and future medical expenses is granted; issue of general damages is postponed sine die.

Orders

  • The application to lead expert evidence on affidavit in terms of Rule 38(2) is granted.
  • The defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff R440,758.00 for loss of future income.