Mhlongo v Road Accident Fund (6991/15) [2020] ZAGPPHC 660 (23 October 2020)

Mhlongo v Road Accident Fund (6991/15) [2020] ZAGPPHC 660 (23 October 2020)

The court found that the plaintiff suffered moderate to severe brain injury, resulting in significant cognitive and physical impairments that have reduced her employability and earning potential. The evidence did not support that the plaintiff would have obtained a degree, but it was accepted that she would have attained a diploma qualifying her as a tour guide. The defendant's argument regarding financial constraints was rejected, as the plaintiff could have obtained third-party funding or worked part-time. The court determined that contingency deductions should be 5% for past loss of earnings, 20% for future loss of earnings on the uninjured scenario (to account for possible financial...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 660
Parties
Plaintiff: Nompumelelo Mhlongo; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Case Number
6991/15
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum of Damages
Outcome
The court assessed contingency deductions for loss of earnings and directed the plaintiff to obtain an updated actuarial calculation and draft order reflecting compensation for past and future loss of earnings, payment of costs, and interest.
Judges
SK Hassim
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earnings, Contingency Deductions, Personal Injury, Quantum of Damages
Civil Procedure Delict Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earnings Contingency Deductions Personal Injury 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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nompumelelo Mhlongo

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum for the plaintiff's past and future loss of earnings resulting from injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.
  2. 2 What contingency deductions should be applied to the calculation of damages for loss of earnings.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff would have obtained a diploma or degree but for the accident.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff suffered moderate to severe brain injury, resulting in significant cognitive and physical impairments that have reduced her employability and earning potential. The evidence did not support that the plaintiff would have obtained a degree, but it was accepted that she would have attained a diploma qualifying her as a tour guide. The defendant's argument regarding financial constraints was rejected, as the plaintiff could have obtained third-party funding or worked part-time. The court determined that contingency deductions should be 5% for past loss of earnings, 20% for future loss of earnings on the uninjured scenario (to account for possible financial...

Court Disposition

The court assessed contingency deductions for loss of earnings and directed the plaintiff to obtain an updated actuarial calculation and draft order reflecting compensation for past and future loss of earnings, payment of costs, and interest.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is to obtain an updated actuarial calculation of past and future loss of earnings based on the court's contingency deductions.
  • The defendant is to pay the plaintiff compensation for past and future loss of earnings as recalculated.