Molokomme v Road Accident Fund (902/2020) [2025] ZAGPJHC 370 (12 March 2025)

Molokomme v Road Accident Fund (902/2020) [2025] ZAGPJHC 370 (12 March 2025)

The court accepted the expert evidence and actuarial calculations as reasonable and substantiated. Applying a .75% per annum contingency deduction over 40 years to the pre-accident scenario resulted in a 30% deduction, while a 1% per annum deduction over 40 years to the post-accident scenario resulted in a 40% deduction. This approach was justified by the nature and extent of the minor's injuries and the compensation already reflected in the lowered earning trajectory. The net difference between the two scenarios, R1 309 234, was awarded for future loss of earning capacity. The plaintiff's applications for separation of issues and affidavit evidence were granted, and the defendant was...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 370
Parties
Plaintiff: Molokomme Nchakga Elizabeth; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 March 2025
Case Number
902/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Liability Conceded
Outcome
Plaintiff's applications granted; defendant ordered to pay future loss of earning capacity and provide unlimited undertaking for future medical expenses.
Judges
Weideman
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earning Capacity, Contingency Deductions, Quantum of Damages
Civil Procedure Delict Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earning Capacity Contingency Deductions 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Molokomme Nchakga Elizabeth

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Liability Conceded

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum for future loss of earning capacity resulting from the minor's injuries sustained in the motor vehicle accident.
  2. 2 What contingency deductions should be applied to the pre- and post-accident earning scenarios.
  3. 3 Should the plaintiff's applications for separation of issues and affidavit evidence be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the expert evidence and actuarial calculations as reasonable and substantiated. Applying a .75% per annum contingency deduction over 40 years to the pre-accident scenario resulted in a 30% deduction, while a 1% per annum deduction over 40 years to the post-accident scenario resulted in a 40% deduction. This approach was justified by the nature and extent of the minor's injuries and the compensation already reflected in the lowered earning trajectory. The net difference between the two scenarios, R1 309 234, was awarded for future loss of earning capacity. The plaintiff's applications for separation of issues and affidavit evidence were granted, and the defendant was...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's applications granted; defendant ordered to pay future loss of earning capacity and provide unlimited undertaking for future medical expenses.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's application in terms of Rule 33(4) to separate and postpone sine die the heads of damage for past hospital and medical expenses and general damages is granted.
  • The plaintiff's application in terms of Rule 38(2) to present evidence on affidavit is granted.