Pizani v Minister of Defence (75/87) [1987] ZASCA 73 (25 August 1987)

Pizani v Minister of Defence (75/87) [1987] ZASCA 73 (25 August 1987)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 113(1) of the Defence Act 44 of 1957 establishes a statutory expiry period, barring actions instituted more than six months after the cause of action arose. The appellant's cause of action, based on alleged negligent treatment by an army doctor, arose on 15 September 1983, but the action was only instituted on 10 April 1984, outside the prescribed period. The Court rejected the appellant's argument that the regulations precluded him from seeking a second opinion, finding no express or implied prohibition against consulting a private practitioner at his own expense. The principle of impossibility, as applied in Montsisi, was not triggered...

Citation
[1987] ZASCA 73
Parties
Appellant: Derek Reginald Pizani; Respondent: The Honourable The Minister of Defence
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 August 1987
Case Number
75/87
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Transvaal Provincial Division on Special Plea Regarding Statutory Time Bar
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Corbett, Hefer, Grosskopf, Vivier, Steyn
Legal Topics
Statutory Time Bar, Expiry Period, Duty of Care, Medical Negligence, Impossibility, Replication
Civil Procedure Delict Statutory Time Bar Expiry Period Duty of Care Medical Negligence Impossibility Replication

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Derek Reginald Pizani

Appellant

The Honourable The Minister of Defence

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Transvaal Provincial Division on Special Plea Regarding Statutory Time Bar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's claim for damages against the Minister of Defence is barred by the expiry period in section 113(1) of the Defence Act 44 of 1957.
  2. 2 Whether the principle of impossibility applies to suspend the running of the expiry period under section 113(1) in the circumstances of the case.
  3. 3 Whether the regulations governing medical treatment for members of the SADF precluded the appellant from seeking a second medical opinion and thus rendered compliance with section 113(1) impossible.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 113(1) of the Defence Act 44 of 1957 establishes a statutory expiry period, barring actions instituted more than six months after the cause of action arose. The appellant's cause of action, based on alleged negligent treatment by an army doctor, arose on 15 September 1983, but the action was only instituted on 10 April 1984, outside the prescribed period. The Court rejected the appellant's argument that the regulations precluded him from seeking a second opinion, finding no express or implied prohibition against consulting a private practitioner at his own expense. The principle of impossibility, as applied in Montsisi, was not triggered...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.