Sibisi v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (46617/2018) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1351 (21 November 2023)

Sibisi v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (46617/2018) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1351 (21 November 2023)

The court found the plaintiff's version improbable and unsupported by reliable evidence. The train guard and security personnel credibly testified that no incident occurred at Marafe station on 9 July 2018, and the train doors were operational. The treating doctor recorded that the plaintiff stated she had injured her ankle two days prior by twisting it on a pavement, not by falling from a train. The plaintiff failed to call corroborating witnesses, such as her son or the doctor who made the relevant hospital record entries. The hospital records relied upon were hearsay and not admissible without proper foundation. The plaintiff did not discharge the onus of proof on a balance of...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1351
Parties
Plaintiff: Gladys Sibisi; Defendant: Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 November 2023
Case Number
46617/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated by Prior Order
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Ford
Legal Topics
Negligence, Wrongfulness, Burden of Proof, Hearsay Evidence, Public Carrier Liability
Delict Civil Procedure Negligence Wrongfulness Burden of Proof Hearsay Evidence Public Carrier Liability

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gladys Sibisi

Plaintiff

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated by Prior Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was pushed out of a moving train operated by the defendant on 9 July 2018.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is liable in delict for the injuries allegedly sustained by the plaintiff.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff discharged the onus of proof on a balance of probabilities.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the plaintiff's version improbable and unsupported by reliable evidence. The train guard and security personnel credibly testified that no incident occurred at Marafe station on 9 July 2018, and the train doors were operational. The treating doctor recorded that the plaintiff stated she had injured her ankle two days prior by twisting it on a pavement, not by falling from a train. The plaintiff failed to call corroborating witnesses, such as her son or the doctor who made the relevant hospital record entries. The hospital records relied upon were hearsay and not admissible without proper foundation. The plaintiff did not discharge the onus of proof on a balance of...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
  • The plaintiff is ordered to pay the defendant's costs.