Riekert and Another v Branch (1766/2009) [2011] ZAECPEHC 49 (24 November 2011)

Riekert and Another v Branch (1766/2009) [2011] ZAECPEHC 49 (24 November 2011)

The court found that the defendant's version of events was entirely incompatible with the medical evidence and improbable. The injuries sustained by the plaintiff could not have been caused in the manner described by the defendant and were consistent only with the plaintiff's account. The defendant failed to discharge the onus of proving self defence. The medical reports, particularly Dr Keeley's, were accepted as reliable and corroborated the plaintiff's version. The defendant was found to be the aggressor. The quantum of general damages was assessed at R150,000.00, taking into account the nature of the injuries, the plaintiff's recovery, and the lasting sequelae. The defendant's...

Citation
[2011] ZAECPEHC 49
Parties
Plaintiff: Jeremy Luke Riekert; Plaintiff: Sheila Ann Riekert; Defendant: Christopher Branch
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 November 2011
Case Number
1766/2009
Procedural Posture
Delictual Action / Trial and Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs. Defendant's counter-claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Chetty
Legal Topics
Assault, Self Defence, Quantum of Damages, Medical Evidence, Burden of Proof
Delict Assault Self Defence Quantum of Damages Medical Evidence Burden of Proof

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jeremy Luke Riekert

Plaintiff

Sheila Ann Riekert

Plaintiff

Christopher Branch

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Delictual Action / Trial and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant acted in self defence when assaulting the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the injuries sustained by the plaintiff were consistent with the defendant's version of events.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate quantum of damages for the plaintiff's injuries and contumelia.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's version of events was entirely incompatible with the medical evidence and improbable. The injuries sustained by the plaintiff could not have been caused in the manner described by the defendant and were consistent only with the plaintiff's account. The defendant failed to discharge the onus of proving self defence. The medical reports, particularly Dr Keeley's, were accepted as reliable and corroborated the plaintiff's version. The defendant was found to be the aggressor. The quantum of general damages was assessed at R150,000.00, taking into account the nature of the injuries, the plaintiff's recovery, and the lasting sequelae. The defendant's...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs. Defendant's counter-claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of R150,000.00 as general damages.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the second plaintiff the sum of R91,788.42 in respect of past medical expenses.