Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
R.M v MEC for the Department of Education, Limpopo (4242/2016) [2025] ZALMPPHC 28 (24 February 2025)
The High Court found the Limpopo education MEC liable after a learner was injured when she tripped on an uneven netball field during school practice.
Kotze v The Minister of Safety and Security (2009/36826) [2024] ZAGPJHC 403 (29 March 2024)
The High Court dismissed the defendant’s application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospect of success on factual causation and awarding costs.
A.M obo L.M v Member of the Executive Council for Health, Eastern Cape Province (586/2017) [2023] ZAECBHC 26 (30 August 2023)
The High Court granted leave to appeal in a medical negligence damages case, finding it reasonably possible an appeal court could differ on factual causation.
R.S.L obo T.M v MEC of Health, Gauteng [2023] ZAGPPHC 251; 13493/18 (4 April 2023)
The court found that the defendant's staff failed to monitor the plaintiff and foetus adequately during labour, constituting substandard nursing care and a breach of the duty of care. The lack of monitoring and delayed intervention, including the failure to perform a caesarean section when indicated, was causally linked to the hypoxic ischaemic injury and resultant cerebral palsy suffered by the child. The court applied the 'but for' test and concluded that, on a balance of probabilities, proper monitoring and timely action would have prevented the injury. The defendant's conduct was negligen…
Source excerpt
Frantzen v Road Accident Fund (331/2021) [2022] ZASCA 107; [2022] 3 All SA 657 (SCA); 2023 (1) SA 52 (SCA) (15 July 2022)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that the soft tissue injury sustained in the 2007 accident was causally connected to the onset of dystonia. While the expert evidence presented by Dr Smuts relied on the Jankovic criteria and medical literature, the court found that the application of the third criterion—anatomical relationship between injury and disorder—was not adequately explained, especially given the generalised nature of the appellant's dystonia. The court held that the expert's reasoning did not sufficiently account…
Source excerpt
NVM obo VKM v Tembisa Hospital and Another (CCT 202/20) [2022] ZACC 11; 2022 (6) BCLR 707 (CC) (25 March 2022)
The Constitutional Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the matter, as the sole issue was factual causation in a medical negligence claim and did not raise a constitutional issue or an arguable point of law of general public importance. The majority found that the applicant's challenge was to the factual findings of the Full Court, not to any legal or constitutional principle. The Court emphasised that its jurisdiction does not extend to purely factual disputes, even where lower courts may have erred on the facts. The application of the 'but for' test for causation was no…
Source excerpt
J.A obo D.M.A v Member of Executive Council for Health, Eastern Cape (C.A.& R: 8/2021) [2022] ZAECBHC 1; [2022] 2 All SA 112 (ECB); 2022 (3) SA 475 (ECB) (21 January 2022)
The court found that the appellant's expert evidence, supported by joint minutes from radiologists, obstetricians, and geneticists, established on a balance of probabilities that DMA's brain injury was caused by prolonged partial hypoxic ischemia during labour, resulting from the respondent's negligent management of the birth process. The respondent's alternative theory of a neurometabolic disorder (NKH) was speculative, unsupported by the imaging evidence, and contradicted by joint expert opinions and uncontested facts. The trial court erred in treating the expert opinions as equally balance…
Source excerpt
Salie v Western Province Athletics and Another (7599/2015) [2021] ZAWCHC 52 (19 March 2021)
Delict claim arising from a road-race collision dismissed after the court found no negligence by the organiser or runner and no proven wrongful omission.
MEC Department Police Roads & Transport, FS Province v Roberts and Another (A116-2019) [2020] ZAFSHC 23; 2020 (3) SA 478 (FB) (13 February 2020)
The appeal succeeded because the respondents failed to prove that vegetation control caused the kudu collision, and judicial notice of kudu behavior was impermissible.
AN v MEC for Health, Eastern Cape (585/2018) [2019] ZASCA 102; [2019] 4 All SA 1 (SCA) (15 August 2019)
The majority held that although the hospital staff negligently failed to monitor the mother and foetus during labour, factual causation between this negligence and the child's brain damage was not established. The evidence showed that the injury resulted from a sudden, total, and persistent interruption of blood supply to the brain (a sentinel event), which occurred without warning and could not have been detected or prevented by proper monitoring. Authoritative literature and expert consensus indicated that such events often provide no forewarning, and expedited delivery would not have avert…
Source excerpt
Explore more
