Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Delict [2021] ZAGPPHC 51

Potgieter v Road Accident Fund (82531/2017)

Potgieter v Road Accident Fund (82531/2017) [2021] ZAGPPHC 51 (26 April 2021)

The High Court awarded the plaintiff R2,218,615 for future loss of earnings after finding his accident injuries reduced his earning capacity.

  • Road Accident Fund Act
  • Loss Of Earning Capacity
  • Contingency Allowance
  • Quantification Of Damages
  • Road-accident-fund
  • Loss-of-earning-capacity
Read case analysis
Delict [2019] ZAGPPHC 293

Sohaba v Road Accident Fund (96985/2016)

Sohaba v Road Accident Fund (96985/2016) [2019] ZAGPPHC 293 (4 July 2019)

Road Accident Fund damages award for taxi-passenger injuries, with general damages, past medical expenses, and loss of earnings assessed after merits were conceded.

  • Road Accident Fund
  • General Damages
  • Loss Of Earnings
  • Medical Expenses
  • Expert Evidence
  • Contingency Allowance
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2011] ZAGPJHC 150

Nienaber v Road Accident Fund (A5012/11)

Nienaber v Road Accident Fund (A5012/11) [2011] ZAGPJHC 150 (27 October 2011)

The High Court partly upheld an appeal on future loss of earning capacity, rejecting binding force of expert retirement opinion and recalculating damages to R860,597.50.

  • Loss Of Earning Capacity
  • Contingency Allowance
  • Expert Evidence Weight
  • Actuarial Calculation
  • Future Medical Expenses
  • Loss-of-earning-capacity
Read case analysis
Delict [1997] ZASCA 104

Ghyoot v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund (458/95)

Ghyoot v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund (458/95) [1997] ZASCA 104 (25 November 1997)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court's awards for past and future loss of earnings were justified and not inadequate. The evidence did not establish that the farming venture was viable, nor that the cost of employing a manager was an appropriate measure of future loss. The trial judge's application of a 30% contingency allowance to the past loss of earnings was within his discretion, given the risks associated with agricultural production. The appellant's arguments regarding the viability of the farm and the quantification of future loss were not supported by admissible evide…

  • Loss Of Earnings
  • Quantification Of Damages
  • Contingency Allowance
  • Earning Capacity
  • Viability Of Business
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.