Molefe v Mahaeng (431/96) [1998] ZASCA 81; 1999 (1) SA 562 (SCA); [1998] 4 All SA 423 (A) (25 September 1998)

Molefe v Mahaeng (431/96) [1998] ZASCA 81; 1999 (1) SA 562 (SCA); [1998] 4 All SA 423 (A) (25 September 1998)

The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent's conduct in driving onto the incorrect side of the road was a voluntary act attributable to negligence. The evidence established that the respondent suffered a fall earlier that morning, which could have caused a black-out, and he complained of loss of consciousness to the police shortly after the accident. Although there were shortcomings in the respondent's testimony and delays in reporting the black-out to medical personnel, these did not amount to deliberate untruthfulness or fabrication. There was no evidence that the respondent was aware or should have been aware of the...

Citation
[1998] ZASCA 81
Parties
Appellant: Johannes Molefe; Respondent: Freddy Mahaeng
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 September 1998
Case Number
431/96
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Hefer, Zulman, Melunsky
Legal Topics
Automatism, Onus of Proof, Negligence, Motor Vehicle Collision
Delict Automatism Onus of Proof Negligence Motor Vehicle Collision

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johannes Molefe

Appellant

Freddy Mahaeng

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's conduct in driving onto the incorrect side of the road was a voluntary act attributable to negligence.
  2. 2 Whether the defence of automatism (black-out) was established on a balance of probabilities.
  3. 3 Who bears the onus of proof regarding negligence and automatism in delictual claims arising from motor vehicle collisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent's conduct in driving onto the incorrect side of the road was a voluntary act attributable to negligence. The evidence established that the respondent suffered a fall earlier that morning, which could have caused a black-out, and he complained of loss of consciousness to the police shortly after the accident. Although there were shortcomings in the respondent's testimony and delays in reporting the black-out to medical personnel, these did not amount to deliberate untruthfulness or fabrication. There was no evidence that the respondent was aware or should have been aware of the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.