Knoetze v Rand Mutual Assurance (A3047/2021)
Knoetze v Rand Mutual Assurance (A3047/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 4; [2022] 2 All SA 458 (GJ); (2022) 43 ILJ 1153 (GJ) (12 January 2022)
The court held that the tribunal misinterpreted and misapplied sections 65(1)(a) and 66 of COIDA by requiring the appellant to prove a causal connection between his hearing impairment and his employment before the statutory presumption could operate. The evidence established that the appellant contracted a listed occupational disease (hearing impairment) while performing listed work (exposure to noise) over a 39-year mining career. This triggered the presumption in section 66, shifting the evidentiary burden to the respondent to prove that the disease did not arise out of and in the course of…
Source excerpt
- Occupational Disease
- Compensation For Injuries
- Statutory Interpretation
- Noise Induced Hearing Loss