Rae v Road Accident Fund (3473/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 613 (27 September 2021)

Rae v Road Accident Fund (3473/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 613 (27 September 2021)

The court found that both the plaintiff and the insured driver who ran over him were negligent. The plaintiff contributed to the accident by driving at excessive speed, failing to keep a proper look-out, and not having regard for other road users. The insured driver also failed to keep a proper look-out and did not maintain a safe following distance. Applying the Apportionment of Damages Act, the court held that the plaintiff was entitled to compensation for 75% of his proven damages. The quantum was determined based on expert evidence regarding his injuries, impairment, and loss of earning capacity. The court awarded damages for past medical expenses, past and future loss of earnings,...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 613
Parties
Plaintiff: A. Rae; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 September 2021
Case Number
3473/2020
Procedural Posture
Default Judgment Application / Judgment After Application for Default Judgment
Outcome
Default judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff. Defendant is liable for 75% of the plaintiff's proven or agreed damages.
Judges
Khwinana
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Apportionment of Damages, Personal Injury, Quantum of Damages, Default Judgment
Delict Civil Procedure Road Accident Fund Act Apportionment of Damages Personal Injury Quantum of Damages Default Judgment

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. Rae

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Default Judgment Application / Judgment After Application for Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable for damages arising from the motor vehicle accident involving the plaintiff.
  2. 2 To what extent the plaintiff contributed to the accident and the apportionment of liability.
  3. 3 The quantum of damages to be awarded for past and future loss of earnings, medical expenses, and general damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the plaintiff and the insured driver who ran over him were negligent. The plaintiff contributed to the accident by driving at excessive speed, failing to keep a proper look-out, and not having regard for other road users. The insured driver also failed to keep a proper look-out and did not maintain a safe following distance. Applying the Apportionment of Damages Act, the court held that the plaintiff was entitled to compensation for 75% of his proven damages. The quantum was determined based on expert evidence regarding his injuries, impairment, and loss of earning capacity. The court awarded damages for past medical expenses, past and future loss of earnings,...

Court Disposition

Default judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff. Defendant is liable for 75% of the plaintiff's proven or agreed damages.

Orders

  • Defendant is liable for 75% of the plaintiff's proven or agreed damages.
  • Defendant to pay past medical expenses of R300,000.00.