Roman's Transport CC v Zihlwele and Another (13/2014) [2015] ZASCA 13 (16 March 2015)

Roman's Transport CC v Zihlwele and Another (13/2014) [2015] ZASCA 13 (16 March 2015)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the bus driver was confronted with a sudden emergency when the right front tyre burst, causing the bus to veer uncontrollably. The driver’s decision not to apply the brakes immediately was reasonable under the circumstances, as expert evidence established that immediate braking could have resulted in a greater loss of control. The court held that the rejection of the defendant’s expert evidence by the court below was incorrect, as it was based on the driver’s actual experience and the practical difficulties of applying brakes in such a situation. The driver’s actions were consistent with what a reasonable person would have done when faced with a...

Citation
[2015] ZASCA 13
Parties
Appellant: Roman's Transport CC; Respondent: Sisa Zihlwele; Respondent: Neliswa Nobomvu
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 March 2015
Case Number
13/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape Local Division, Mthatha
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of the court below set aside; plaintiffs' claims dismissed with costs.
Judges
Cachalia, Shongwe, Zondi, Fourie, Meyer
Legal Topics
Negligence, Sudden Emergency, Expert Evidence, Motor Vehicle Accident
Delict Negligence Sudden Emergency Expert Evidence Motor Vehicle Accident

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roman's Transport CC

Appellant

Sisa Zihlwele

Respondent

Neliswa Nobomvu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape Local Division, Mthatha

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bus driver was negligent in failing to apply brakes timeously after a sudden tyre blowout.
  2. 2 Whether the collision was caused by a failure to exercise reasonable care under a sudden emergency.
  3. 3 How conflicting expert evidence regarding braking and control should be evaluated.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the bus driver was confronted with a sudden emergency when the right front tyre burst, causing the bus to veer uncontrollably. The driver’s decision not to apply the brakes immediately was reasonable under the circumstances, as expert evidence established that immediate braking could have resulted in a greater loss of control. The court held that the rejection of the defendant’s expert evidence by the court below was incorrect, as it was based on the driver’s actual experience and the practical difficulties of applying brakes in such a situation. The driver’s actions were consistent with what a reasonable person would have done when faced with a...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of the court below set aside; plaintiffs' claims dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds with costs.
  • The order of the court below is set aside and substituted with: 'The plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed with costs.'