Mbiza v Road Accident Fund (85650/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 643 (11 June 2025)

Mbiza v Road Accident Fund (85650/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 643 (11 June 2025)

The court found that the defendant's insured driver was negligent and responsible for the accident in which the plaintiff was injured as a passenger. The defendant did not provide any expert evidence to rebut the plaintiff's case or support its defence of contributory negligence. The plaintiff's expert evidence was accepted as uncontradicted and credible. The court determined that the plaintiff's injuries rendered her unable to return to her self-employment and justified compensation for past and future loss of earnings. The actuarial calculations and contingency deductions proposed by the plaintiff were found to be fair and reasonable. The defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 643
Parties
Plaintiff: Nancy Mbiza; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2025
Case Number
85650/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for pecuniary damages is upheld; defendant is liable for 100% of proven damages. General damages postponed sine die.
Judges
Marumoagae
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Negligence, Loss of Earnings, Contingency Deductions, General Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Negligence Loss of Earnings Contingency Deductions 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nancy Mbiza

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for injuries sustained as a passenger in a motor vehicle collision.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff contributed to her injuries by failing to fasten her safety belt.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate quantum for pecuniary damages, including past and future loss of earnings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's insured driver was negligent and responsible for the accident in which the plaintiff was injured as a passenger. The defendant did not provide any expert evidence to rebut the plaintiff's case or support its defence of contributory negligence. The plaintiff's expert evidence was accepted as uncontradicted and credible. The court determined that the plaintiff's injuries rendered her unable to return to her self-employment and justified compensation for past and future loss of earnings. The actuarial calculations and contingency deductions proposed by the plaintiff were found to be fair and reasonable. The defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for pecuniary damages is upheld; defendant is liable for 100% of proven damages. General damages postponed sine die.

Orders

  • The defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff 100% for her proven damages.
  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff R1,345,326.55 in respect of past and future loss of earnings.