Van der Merwe v Road Accident Fund (46899/17) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1047 (9 June 2019)

Van der Merwe v Road Accident Fund (46899/17) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1047 (9 June 2019)

The court found that the plaintiff's version of events was plausible and supported by expert evidence. The plaintiff acted as any reasonable driver would have under the circumstances, swerving to avoid a collision with an unidentified motorcycle travelling at excessive speed. The defendant's argument for apportionment was considered but rejected on the facts, as the accident was caused solely by the unidentified vehicle's negligent conduct. The defendant is therefore 100% liable for the plaintiff's proven damages.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 1047
Parties
Plaintiff: L F Van der Merwe; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 June 2019
Case Number
46899/17
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Separated From Quantum; Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff on the merits; defendant held 100% liable for proven damages.
Judges
Neukircher
Legal Topics
Road Accident Fund Liability, Negligence, Apportionment of Damages Act, Motor Vehicle Accident
Delict Road Accident Fund Liability Negligence Apportionment of Damages Act 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L F Van der Merwe

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Separated From Quantum; Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable for damages arising from the motor vehicle accident involving an unidentified vehicle.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was negligent and whether apportionment of damages is applicable.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's version of the accident is plausible and supported by expert evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's version of events was plausible and supported by expert evidence. The plaintiff acted as any reasonable driver would have under the circumstances, swerving to avoid a collision with an unidentified motorcycle travelling at excessive speed. The defendant's argument for apportionment was considered but rejected on the facts, as the accident was caused solely by the unidentified vehicle's negligent conduct. The defendant is therefore 100% liable for the plaintiff's proven damages.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff on the merits; defendant held 100% liable for proven damages.

Orders

  • The defendant is liable for 100% of the plaintiff's proven or agreed damages arising out of the motor vehicle accident of 12 June 2016.
  • The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs including the qualifying fees of the plaintiff's expert Professor Lemmer.