Motswiane v Road accident Fund (14249/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 386 (24 April 2017)

Motswiane v Road accident Fund (14249/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 386 (24 April 2017)

The court found that the plaintiff did not suffer any past loss of income because he was unemployed at the time of the accident and would have taken a year to secure employment regardless. However, the plaintiff's impairments resulting from the accident have compromised his prospects of employment in the Pipe Track Ventilation field, a preference now unattainable. Both industrial psychologists agreed that the plaintiff's future employment would be limited to lower-paying security services positions. The court accepted the first scenario in the actuarial report for future loss of income, applying a higher contingency deduction of 15-20%, resulting in an award of R544,858.40 for future loss...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 386
Parties
Plaintiff: Patrick Mogasho Motswiane; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 April 2017
Case Number
14249/2015
Procedural Posture
Delictual Claim / Quantum Determination After Merits Conceded
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for past loss of income dismissed; plaintiff awarded R544,858.40 for future loss of income; defendant ordered to pay costs and provide statutory undertaking for future medical expenses.
Judges
Van der Westhuizen
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund, Loss of Income, Future Loss of Earnings, Contingency Deduction
Delict Road Accident Fund Loss of Income Future Loss of Earnings Contingency Deduction

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Mogasho Motswiane

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Delictual Claim / Quantum Determination After Merits Conceded

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff suffered past loss of income as a result of the accident.
  2. 2 What is the appropriate quantum for future loss of income given the plaintiff's impairments.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's employment prospects in the Pipe Track Ventilation field were compromised by the accident.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff did not suffer any past loss of income because he was unemployed at the time of the accident and would have taken a year to secure employment regardless. However, the plaintiff's impairments resulting from the accident have compromised his prospects of employment in the Pipe Track Ventilation field, a preference now unattainable. Both industrial psychologists agreed that the plaintiff's future employment would be limited to lower-paying security services positions. The court accepted the first scenario in the actuarial report for future loss of income, applying a higher contingency deduction of 15-20%, resulting in an award of R544,858.40 for future loss...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for past loss of income dismissed; plaintiff awarded R544,858.40 for future loss of income; defendant ordered to pay costs and provide statutory undertaking for future medical expenses.

Orders

  • Defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the sum of R544,858.40 for delictual damages.
  • Defendant shall pay interest at 10.5% per annum on the amount if not paid timeously, calculated from the 15th calendar day after the date of this order to date of payment.