Road Accident Fund v Lombard and Another (74084/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1937 (16 November 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] ZAGPPHC 1937
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Panel
- Botha
- Case number
- 74084/2019
More details
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Panel
- Botha
- Case number
- 74084/2019
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that interest on judgment debts against the Road Accident Fund follows ex lege and commences 14 days after the date of judgment in accordance with section 17(3)(a) of Act 56 of 1996. The original order by Millar J did not expressly mention interest, but the legal position is that interest accrues automatically. To avoid future disputes and unnecessary applications, the court found it advisable to include a specific prayer for interest in the order. Accordingly, the order of Millar J was varied to include interest running from 14 days after the date of the order until payment. The application for condonation was granted, and the respondent's claim for interest was upheld by varying the original order.
Court disposition
Application for condonation granted; original order varied to include interest on judgment debt.
Orders
- The late filing of the application is condoned.
- It is declared that interest follows ex lege on any judgment debt against the Road Accident Fund and starts running in terms of section 17(3)(a) of Act 56 of 1996 after 14 days from the date of judgment.
- The order of Millar J is varied to include interest running from 14 days after the date of the order until payment.
- It is advisable that a specific prayer for interest be contained in future orders to prevent unnecessary applications.
02
Material facts
Parties
Road Accident Fund
Applicant Counsel: Ms B RangataHenry Lombard
Respondent Counsel: Adv SJ MyburgThe Sheriff Centurion East
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Application / Application for Condonation and Variation of Order
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the late filing of the application should be condoned.
- 02
Whether interest on late payment of capital by the applicant should be dismissed or incorporated into the order.
- 03
Whether the original court order should be varied to include interest on late payment of capital.
- 04
Whether the respondent should pay the costs of the application in the event of opposition.
- 05
Whether the order should be suspended pending determination of the interest claim.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant sought condonation for the late filing of the application and argued that the claim for interest on late payment of capital should be dismissed. Alternatively, the applicant requested that the court order be varied to include interest on late payment of capital. The applicant also requested that the respondent pay the costs of the application if opposed and that the order be suspended pending determination of the interest claim.
- Respondent
- The respondent argued that interest on judgment debts against the Road Accident Fund accrues ex lege and should be included in the order. The respondent relied on relevant case law to support the position that interest runs from 14 days after the date of judgment in terms of section 17(3)(a) of Act 56 of 1996. The respondent opposed the dismissal of the interest claim and supported the variation of the original order to explicitly include interest.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 17(3)(a) of Act 56 of 1996
Interest on judgment debts against the Road Accident Fund accrues ex lege and commences 14 days after the date of judgment.
- 02
General Accident Versekerings Maatskappy Suid Afrika Bpk v Bailey NO 1988 (4) SA 353 (A)
It is advisable for a specific prayer for interest to be included in the court order to avoid unnecessary applications.
- 03
Thoroughbred Breeders Association v Price Waterhouse 2001 (4) SA 551 (SCA)
A court order may be varied to include interest where it was not expressly stated but is required by law.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that interest on judgment debts against the Road Accident Fund follows ex lege and commences 14 days after the date of judgment in accordance with section 17(3)(a) of Act 56 of 1996. The original order by Millar J did not expressly mention interest, but the legal position is that interest accrues automatically. To avoid future disputes and unnecessary applications, the court found it advisable to include a specific prayer for interest in the order. Accordingly, the order of Millar J was varied to include interest running from 14 days after the date of the order until payment. The application for condonation was granted, and the respondent's claim for interest was upheld by varying the original order.
Obiter and limits
- It is preferable for parties to include a specific prayer for interest in their orders to prevent future applications and disputes.
- The issue of interest was argued before Millar J, who was of the view that interest need not be incorporated in a court order as it follows ex lege.
Court disposition
Application for condonation granted; original order varied to include interest on judgment debt.
- The late filing of the application is condoned.
- It is declared that interest follows ex lege on any judgment debt against the Road Accident Fund and starts running in terms of section 17(3)(a) of Act 56 of 1996 after 14 days from the date of judgment.
- The order of Millar J is varied to include interest running from 14 days after the date of the order until payment.
- It is advisable that a specific prayer for interest be contained in future orders to prevent unnecessary applications.
Source and reliance status
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Judgment
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO: 7 4 0 8 4 / 2 0 1 9
1. REPORTABLE: YES/NO
2. OF INTEREST TP OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
3. REVISED: YES/NO
DATE: 16/11/2023
In the matter between:
Road Accident Fund
Applicant
And
Henry Lombard
1 st Respondent
The Sheriff Centurion East
2nd Respondent
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT
BOTHA AJ
1
Introduction
The Applicant applied for an order in the following terms:
1.1 That the late filing of the application be condoned;
1.2 That the claim for interest for the late payment of the capital by the 1st Respondent be dismissed;
1.3 In the alternative, the Court orders that the court order be varied to include interest on late payment of capital;
1.4 That the 1st Respondent be ordered to pay the costs of this application, in the event of opposition;
1.5 That pending determination of the dismissal of the claim for interest for late payment of capital, the order be suspended or stayed.
2
The order
2.1 On 19 March 2021 Millar J made an order in favour of the 1st Respondent and the Applicant was ordered to pay damages to the 1st Respondent within 14 days after the order.
2.2 The order of Millar J did not specifically mentioned the payment of interest.
2.2 Apparently the issue of interest was raised and argued before Millar J and his view was that the aspect of interest need not be incorporated in a court order as it follows ex lege.
3
3.1 Full argument was presented during this hearing and regard was had to inter alia the following case law:
a) General Accident Versekerings Maatskappy Suid Afrika Bpk v Bailey NO 1988 (4) SA 353 (A);
b) Saunders NO v MEC of the Department of Health: Limpopo Province (899/2013)[2015] ZAGPHC 360 (1 June 2015);
c) Thoroughbred Breeders Association v Price Waterhouse 2001 (4) SA 551 (SCA);
d) Steyn NO v Rona! Bobroff & Partners 2013 (2) SA 311 (SCA);
e) West Rand Estates Ltd v New Zealand Insurance Co Ltd 1926AD 173; and more.
4
After listening to argument by both parties and having debated the issue I made the following ruling that formed the basis for the order:
4.1 It is declared that interest follows ex lege on any judgment debt against the RAF and starts running i.t.o. Sec 17(3) (a) of Act 56 of 1996 after 14 days of the date of the judgment;
4.2 To prevent applications as in the instance, it is advisable that a specific prayer for interest be contained in the order;
4.3 It was further ordered that , ex abudanti cuatela, the order of Millar J be varied to contain an order for interest that starts running 14 days after the date of the order till date of payment.
5
I suffice with my ex tempore judgment and reasons and have nothing more to add.
GB
BOTHA
Acting Judge of the High Court
Gauteng Division, Pretoria
Date of Hearing: 16 October 2023
Judgment delivered: 16 October 2023
Reasons delivered: 16 November 2023
Attorneys for applicant: State Attorney Pretoria
Counsel for applicant: Ms B Rangata
Attorneys for respondent: DWM Attorneys
E- mail nicolette@dwm-attorneys.co.za
Counsel for respondent:Adv SJ Myburg
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.