Wilcocks v Hlongwa (5230/2008) [2011] ZAGPJHC 248 (9 December 2011)

Wilcocks v Hlongwa (5230/2008) [2011] ZAGPJHC 248 (9 December 2011)

The court found that the plaintiff was a self-employed handyman at the time of the accident and, but for the accident, would have continued in this capacity, gradually increasing his earnings and working until age 70. The evidence of Ms May was accepted as realistic and rationally based, while the defendant's expert evidence was found to be improbable and not supported by the facts. The actuarial calculations of Mr Kramer, which applied conservative contingency deductions, were preferred over those of Mr Jacobson. The court awarded damages based on the agreed amounts for medical expenses and general damages, and the calculated amounts for past and future loss of earnings, resulting in a...

Citation
[2011] ZAGPJHC 248
Parties
Plaintiff: Osmund Donald Wilcocks; Defendant: Brian Hlongwa
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 December 2011
Case Number
5230/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum Determination
Outcome
Judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant for payment of R3,007,384.00, inclusive of interim payments, with interest and costs.
Judges
EF Dippenaar
Legal Topics
Medical Negligence, Loss of Earnings, Quantum of Damages, Contingency Deductions
Delict Medical Negligence Loss of Earnings Quantum of Damages Contingency Deductions

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Osmund Donald Wilcocks

Plaintiff

Brian Hlongwa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum of damages for the plaintiff's loss of earnings and future earning capacity resulting from medical negligence leading to amputation.
  2. 2 Was the plaintiff self-employed or unemployed at the time of the accident, and how does this affect the calculation of damages.
  3. 3 What contingencies should be applied to the calculation of past and future loss of earnings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was a self-employed handyman at the time of the accident and, but for the accident, would have continued in this capacity, gradually increasing his earnings and working until age 70. The evidence of Ms May was accepted as realistic and rationally based, while the defendant's expert evidence was found to be improbable and not supported by the facts. The actuarial calculations of Mr Kramer, which applied conservative contingency deductions, were preferred over those of Mr Jacobson. The court awarded damages based on the agreed amounts for medical expenses and general damages, and the calculated amounts for past and future loss of earnings, resulting in a...

Court Disposition

Judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant for payment of R3,007,384.00, inclusive of interim payments, with interest and costs.

Orders

  • Payment of the sum of R3,007,384.00 to the plaintiff.
  • The amount is inclusive of any interim payment made in terms of the order of 23 November 2010.