V.L.J obo A.O.J v Member of the Executive Council for Health - Free State Provincial Government (4469/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 270 (23 August 2024)

V.L.J obo A.O.J v Member of the Executive Council for Health - Free State Provincial Government (4469/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 270 (23 August 2024)

The court found that the applicant failed to meet all statutory requirements for condonation under section 3(4)(b) of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act. Specifically, the applicant did not allege or prove that the organ of state would not suffer unreasonable prejudice due to non-compliance. The applicant's authority to institute proceedings was not established, and the authenticity of her signatures was not confirmed. No medical opinion or supporting evidence was provided to substantiate the claim of medical negligence. The applicant did not reply to material allegations in the respondent's answering affidavit, and the court accepted the respondent's...

Citation
[2024] ZAFSHC 270
Parties
Applicant: V.L.J obo A.O.J; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council for Health – Free State Provincial Government
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 August 2024
Case Number
4469/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Condonation and Opposition to Prescription
Outcome
Application dismissed with each party to pay its own costs.
Judges
Cronje, AJ
Legal Topics
Condonation, Prescription Act, Medical Negligence, Institution of Legal Proceedings Act, Contingency Fee Agreement
Civil Procedure Delict Family and Children Condonation Prescription Act Medical Negligence Institution of Legal Proceedings Act Contingency Fee Agreement

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V.L.J obo A.O.J

Applicant

Member of the Executive Council for Health – Free State Provincial Government

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Condonation and Opposition to Prescription

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant met all statutory requirements for condonation under section 3(4)(b) of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's personal claim has prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant had authority to institute proceedings and whether the signatures on the affidavits and power of attorney are valid.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to meet all statutory requirements for condonation under section 3(4)(b) of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act. Specifically, the applicant did not allege or prove that the organ of state would not suffer unreasonable prejudice due to non-compliance. The applicant's authority to institute proceedings was not established, and the authenticity of her signatures was not confirmed. No medical opinion or supporting evidence was provided to substantiate the claim of medical negligence. The applicant did not reply to material allegations in the respondent's answering affidavit, and the court accepted the respondent's...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with each party to pay its own costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party pays its own costs, including costs that stood over.