NSS obo AS v MEC for Health, Eastern Cape Province (017/22) [2023] ZASCA 41; 2023 (6) SA 408 (SCA) (31 March 2023)

NSS obo AS v MEC for Health, Eastern Cape Province (017/22) [2023] ZASCA 41; 2023 (6) SA 408 (SCA) (31 March 2023)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the purported admission by the respondent regarding the expert reports did not constitute a formal admission of fact under section 15 of the Civil Proceedings Evidence Act. Expert opinions are not facts and cannot be admitted as such to bind the court or preclude the presentation of contrary evidence. The court is duty-bound to assess expert evidence independently and is not bound by the opinions of experts, even if those opinions are agreed upon or admitted by a party. The High Court's order, which prevented the plaintiff from adducing evidence to challenge the expert reports, was wrongly made and irreparably prejudiced the minor child. The interests...

Citation
[2023] ZASCA 41
Parties
Appellant: NSS obo AS; Respondent: MEC for Health, Eastern Cape Province
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 March 2023
Case Number
017/22
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Mthatha
Outcome
Appeal upheld; High Court order set aside and replaced.
Judges
Van der Merwe, Schippers, Gorven, Olsen, Mali
Legal Topics
Admissions on Record, Expert Evidence, Medical Negligence, Child Best Interests
Civil Procedure Delict Admissions on Record Expert Evidence Medical Negligence Child Best Interests

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 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NSS obo AS

Appellant

MEC for Health, Eastern Cape Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Mthatha

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a statement by a party that an opponent's expert opinion can be handed in as evidence constitutes a 'fact admitted' under section 15 of the Civil Proceedings Evidence Act 25 of 1965.
  2. 2 Whether the court is bound by the opinion of an opponent's expert when such opinion is admitted.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is precluded from adducing evidence to disprove the contents of the expert reports admitted by the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the purported admission by the respondent regarding the expert reports did not constitute a formal admission of fact under section 15 of the Civil Proceedings Evidence Act. Expert opinions are not facts and cannot be admitted as such to bind the court or preclude the presentation of contrary evidence. The court is duty-bound to assess expert evidence independently and is not bound by the opinions of experts, even if those opinions are agreed upon or admitted by a party. The High Court's order, which prevented the plaintiff from adducing evidence to challenge the expert reports, was wrongly made and irreparably prejudiced the minor child. The interests...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; High Court order set aside and replaced.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
  • The order of the High Court is set aside and replaced by the following order: 'The application for an order that the plaintiff is not entitled to adduce evidence in order to disprove the contents of Prof Lotz’s report dated 30 July 2015, and Dr Alheit’s report dated 27 July 2018, is dismissed with costs, including...