T M v Road Accident Fund (833/2017) [2019] ZAFSHC 31 (5 April 2019)

T M v Road Accident Fund (833/2017) [2019] ZAFSHC 31 (5 April 2019)

The court found that the plaintiff was unable to return to her pre-accident employment due to physical limitations resulting from the accident. Expert evidence established that she is unemployable in the open labour market, given her limited education and work experience. The court accepted Mr Moodie's approach to calculating pre-accident income, using the average between farm worker and packer earnings, as the plaintiff provided proof of employment as a packer. The court determined that a contingency deduction of 5% for past loss and 12.5% for future loss was fair and reasonable, considering the plaintiff's circumstances and prevailing unemployment rates. The defendant was held liable...

Citation
[2019] ZAFSHC 31
Parties
Plaintiff: T M; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 April 2019
Case Number
833/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Separation of Merits and Quantum
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for loss of earnings upheld; defendant ordered to pay apportioned damages and costs.
Judges
I Van Rhyn
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Act, Loss of Earning Capacity, Contingency Deductions, Quantum of Damages
Delict Road Accident Fund Act Loss of Earning Capacity Contingency Deductions Quantum of Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T M

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Separation of Merits and Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum of damages for the plaintiff's loss of earnings and earning capacity resulting from injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.
  2. 2 What contingencies should be applied to the calculation of past and future loss of earnings.
  3. 3 What is the plaintiff's pre-accident income potential and employment history.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was unable to return to her pre-accident employment due to physical limitations resulting from the accident. Expert evidence established that she is unemployable in the open labour market, given her limited education and work experience. The court accepted Mr Moodie's approach to calculating pre-accident income, using the average between farm worker and packer earnings, as the plaintiff provided proof of employment as a packer. The court determined that a contingency deduction of 5% for past loss and 12.5% for future loss was fair and reasonable, considering the plaintiff's circumstances and prevailing unemployment rates. The defendant was held liable...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for loss of earnings upheld; defendant ordered to pay apportioned damages and costs.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to compensate the plaintiff in the amount of R761,031.60.
  • Payment is to be made into the plaintiff attorney's trust account as specified.