Maujean v Marine and Trade Insurance Company Ltd. (107/84) [1984] ZASCA 115 (27 September 1984)

Maujean v Marine and Trade Insurance Company Ltd. (107/84) [1984] ZASCA 115 (27 September 1984)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial judge correctly preferred the evidence of the respondent's witnesses, Durr and his wife, over that of the appellant and his son. The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proof regarding the circumstances of the collision, particularly on the issues of visibility, the position and movement of the vehicles, and the point of impact. The court rejected the appellant's assertions about limited visibility and found no evidence of any obstruction. The trial judge's findings on credibility were upheld, and the appellant's version was deemed improbable. The application to proceed in forma pauperis was dismissed due to the absence of reasonable...

Citation
[1984] ZASCA 115
Parties
Appellant: Joseph Roland Maujean; Respondent: Marine and Trade Insurance Company Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 September 1984
Case Number
107/84
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Witwatersrand Local Division; Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis
Outcome
The application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is dismissed with costs. The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judges
CILLIé, BOTHA, HEFER
Legal Topics
Motor Vehicle Collision, Onus of Proof, Credibility of Witnesses, Absolution From the Instance, In Forma Pauperis, Assessment of Evidence
Civil Procedure Delict Motor Vehicle Collision Onus of Proof Credibility of Witnesses Absolution From the Instance In Forma Pauperis Assessment of Evidence

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

Parties

Joseph Roland Maujean

Appellant

Marine and Trade Insurance Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Witwatersrand Local Division; Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant discharged the onus of proof regarding the circumstances of the motor collision.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court correctly granted absolution from the instance.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant had reasonable prospects of success on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial judge correctly preferred the evidence of the respondent's witnesses, Durr and his wife, over that of the appellant and his son. The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proof regarding the circumstances of the collision, particularly on the issues of visibility, the position and movement of the vehicles, and the point of impact. The court rejected the appellant's assertions about limited visibility and found no evidence of any obstruction. The trial judge's findings on credibility were upheld, and the appellant's version was deemed improbable. The application to proceed in forma pauperis was dismissed due to the absence of reasonable...

Court Disposition

The application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is dismissed with costs. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is dismissed with costs.
  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, excluding the costs of two counsel.