South Africa Case Law

Mothibi v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (23432/18)

Mothibi v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (23432/18) [2021] ZAGPPHC 254 (12 April 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

23432/18

Judge

K J Mogale

The court found that the appeal tribunal failed to exercise its powers to gather further information and did not require additional medical evidence before making its decision. The tribunal's reliance on its own 'feeling' regarding the applicant's spinal and epilepsy injuries, without obtaining radiology reports or further expert assessments, rendered its decision unreasonable and arbitrary. The tribunal misconceived its jurisdiction by acting outside the powers conferred by the Road Accident Fund Act and PAJA. The decision of the tribunal was therefore reviewed and set aside, and the respond…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Road Accident Fund
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Medical Assessment
• Serious Injury
• Tribunal Powers

Motloung v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (9939/2018)

Motloung v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (9939/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 81 (26 February 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

9939/2018

Judge

G.T. Avvakoumides

The court reviewed and set aside a Road Accident Fund Appeal Tribunal decision that found the applicant’s injuries non-serious, ordering reconsideration by a new tribunal.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Road Accident Fund Act
• Procedural Fairness
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Medical Assessment
• General Damages

Geledwana v Minister of Social Development and Others (1678/12)

Geledwana v Minister of Social Development and Others (1678/12) [2013] ZAECMHC 24 (26 September 2013)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

1678/12

Judge

Z.M. Nhlangulela

The court found that the appeal tribunal committed a misdirection by relying on the unverified findings of Dr Funyufunyu and disregarding the detailed medical examination by Dr Mankanku, which supported the applicant's eligibility for a permanent disability grant. Regulation 18 required the tribunal to refer the applicant for a second independent medical examination when faced with conflicting medical reports, which was not done. The applicant's right to just administrative action under PAJA was breached. The court also held that the applicant's delay in bringing the review application was ju…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Social Assistance
• Condonation For Late Filing
• Medical Assessment
• Review Of Administrative Action