Tshabangu v Road Accident Fund (2009/49589) [2011] ZAGPJHC 145 (19 October 2011)

Tshabangu v Road Accident Fund (2009/49589) [2011] ZAGPJHC 145 (19 October 2011)

The court found that both the defendant and its attorneys failed to follow the proper procedures in objecting to the plaintiff's RAF4 forms based on the narrative test. Despite being aware of the plaintiff's claim under the narrative test and receiving relevant RAF4 forms, the defendant persisted with a special plea that had previously been dismissed in similar cases. The attorneys failed to communicate effectively with the defendant and did not seek updated instructions after receiving new evidence. This conduct resulted in unnecessary prolongation of the litigation and wasted court time. The court held that both the defendant and its attorneys failed to a material degree to promote the...

Citation
[2011] ZAGPJHC 145
Parties
Plaintiff: Sydwell Nhlanhla Tshabangu; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 October 2011
Case Number
2009/49589
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Post Trial Costs Determination Following Main Judgment and Rule Nisi
Outcome
The defendant and its attorneys were ordered to pay the costs of the action jointly and severally from 12 May 2011 to the date of judgment, with the defendant to pay the balance of the costs. The registrar was directed to refer the conduct of the attorneys to the Law Society for investigation.
Judges
Weiner
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund, General Damages, Special Plea, Attorney and Client Costs, Failure to Promote Effective Disposal, Narrative Test
Civil Procedure Delict Road Accident Fund General Damages Special Plea Attorney and Client Costs Failure to Promote Effective Disposal Narrative Test

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

Sydwell Nhlanhla Tshabangu

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Post Trial Costs Determination Following Main Judgment and Rule Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant and its attorneys failed to follow proper procedures in objecting to the plaintiff's RAF4 forms based on the narrative test.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant and its attorneys should be held liable for costs on an attorney and client scale de bonis propriis due to their conduct.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's persistence with a special plea was justified in light of previous judgments and the facts of the case.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the defendant and its attorneys failed to follow the proper procedures in objecting to the plaintiff's RAF4 forms based on the narrative test. Despite being aware of the plaintiff's claim under the narrative test and receiving relevant RAF4 forms, the defendant persisted with a special plea that had previously been dismissed in similar cases. The attorneys failed to communicate effectively with the defendant and did not seek updated instructions after receiving new evidence. This conduct resulted in unnecessary prolongation of the litigation and wasted court time. The court held that both the defendant and its attorneys failed to a material degree to promote the...

Court Disposition

The defendant and its attorneys were ordered to pay the costs of the action jointly and severally from 12 May 2011 to the date of judgment, with the defendant to pay the balance of the costs. The registrar was directed to refer the conduct of the attorneys to the Law Society for investigation.

Orders

  • The defendant and the defendant’s attorneys Kekana, Hlatshwayo and Radebe Incorporated are ordered to pay the costs of this action from 12 May 2011 to date hereof jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.
  • The defendant is to pay the balance of the costs.