Ndlovu v Road Accident Fund (33162/2006) [2009] ZAGPPHC 4 (13 March 2009)

Ndlovu v Road Accident Fund (33162/2006) [2009] ZAGPPHC 4 (13 March 2009)

The court found that the plaintiff's version, supported by credible witnesses, was the most probable. The evidence established that the plaintiff was struck on the gravel portion in front of the incomplete building, not on the tarred road as alleged by the defendant. The defendant's version was inconsistent and contradicted by both his own and other witnesses. The court rejected the suggestion that the plaintiff was drunk or solely responsible for the collision. The defendant was found liable for the proven damages suffered by the plaintiff. Quantum had been agreed prior to trial, and the plaintiff was entitled to costs, including the qualifying fees of his expert witnesses.

Citation
[2009] ZAGPPHC 4
Parties
Plaintiff: Timothy Ndlovu; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 March 2009
Case Number
33162/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Liability/merits Determination
Outcome
Plaintiff successful; defendant found liable for proven damages and ordered to pay costs including expert fees.
Judges
W L Seriti
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Negligence, Personal Injury, Quantum of Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Negligence 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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Timothy Ndlovu

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Liability/merits Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the motor vehicle collision.
  2. 2 Whether the collision was caused by the sole negligence of the driver or by contributory negligence of the plaintiff.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was entitled to proven damages and costs including expert fees.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's version, supported by credible witnesses, was the most probable. The evidence established that the plaintiff was struck on the gravel portion in front of the incomplete building, not on the tarred road as alleged by the defendant. The defendant's version was inconsistent and contradicted by both his own and other witnesses. The court rejected the suggestion that the plaintiff was drunk or solely responsible for the collision. The defendant was found liable for the proven damages suffered by the plaintiff. Quantum had been agreed prior to trial, and the plaintiff was entitled to costs, including the qualifying fees of his expert witnesses.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff successful; defendant found liable for proven damages and ordered to pay costs including expert fees.

Orders

  • Defendant must pay the plaintiff's proven damages.
  • Defendant must pay the plaintiff's costs, including the qualifying fees of Drs Lekalakala and Mayayise.