South Africa Case Law

K.M v Road Accident Fund (RAF 276/2022)

K.M v Road Accident Fund (RAF 276/2022) [2025] ZANWHC 133 (25 July 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

RAF 276/2022

Judge

Oosthuizen-Senekal

The plaintiff's claim has not prescribed as the prescription period was suspended during her minority and all procedural steps were taken within the statutory time limits. The quantum of damages is determined based on expert evidence and actuarial calculations, with a 35% contingency deduction applied to pre-morbid earnings to reflect the plaintiff's educational profile and socio-economic risks. The establishment of a trust is warranted to protect the plaintiff's interests, given her youth and the size of the award. The Road Accident Fund is liable for 100% of the plaintiff's proven damages,…

Source excerpt

• Road Accident Fund Act
• Prescription Of Claims
• Contingency Deductions
• Quantification Of Damages
• Establishment Of Trust
• Minor Claimant Protection

Mamafha v TS Makhubela Incorporated and Another (8975/2021)

Mamafha v TS Makhubela Incorporated and Another (8975/2021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 514 (29 May 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

8975/2021

Judge

L. Windell

The High Court dismissed a professional negligence claim after finding the plaintiff’s evidence about the accident was unreliable and inconsistent.

• Professional Negligence
• Road Accident Fund
• Prescription Of Claims
• Burden Of Proof
• Road-accident-fund
• Professional-negligence

Enock and Others v Emfuleni Local Municipality (JS 488/24)

Enock and Others v Emfuleni Local Municipality (JS 488/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 266 (7 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 488/24

Judge

M T M Phehane

The Labour Court dismissed a default judgment application for Sunday overtime pay because the applicants failed to file the affidavits required by Rule 21(2).

• Overtime Pay
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Default Judgment
• Prescription Of Claims
• Default-judgment
• Labour-court-procedure

Body Corporate of Federal Industrsl Park v Pec Metering (Pty) Ltd (31013/2018)

Body Corporate of Federal Industrsl Park v Pec Metering (Pty) Ltd (31013/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 412 (22 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

31013/2018

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court found an oral agreement that trust funds be held for the body corporate’s benefit and ordered PEC Metering to pay the money and interest.

• Trust Account Dispute
• Contractual Entitlement
• Remuneration Calculation
• Prescription Of Claims
• Trust-account-dispute
• Oral-contract

Ndebele v Road Accident Fund (2023/071600)

Ndebele v Road Accident Fund (2023/071600) [2025] ZAGPJHC 395 (17 April 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/071600

Judge

Khashane La M Manamela

The court found that the plaintiff's claim was validly lodged in substantial compliance with section 24 of the Road Accident Fund Act. The supplementation of documents via email was accepted as sufficient to cure the initial objection, and the RAF's insistence on a fresh claim was rejected as contrary to the purpose of the Act. The plaintiff's evidence, supported by expert reports, established that she suffered serious injuries resulting in permanent loss of earning capacity. The RAF failed to provide any contradictory evidence or expert reports. The court held the RAF 100% liable for the pla…

Source excerpt

• Road Accident Fund Act
• Personal Injury
• Prescription Of Claims
• Loss Of Earning Capacity
• Lodgement Of Claim
• Quantum Of Damages

Gcora and Another v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality and Another (1414/2016 ; 992/2016)

Gcora and Another v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality and Another (1414/2016 ; 992/2016) [2025] ZAECQBHC 10 (1 April 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

1414/2016 ; 992/2016

Judge

J W Eksteen

The court held that the applicants, having been declared vexatious litigants, bore the evidential burden to demonstrate bona fide claims with prima facie merit in their requests for leave to institute proceedings. Both requests were unsupported by affidavit and failed to identify a clear cause of action or relief sought. The proposed interdict proceedings sought to challenge cost orders and judgments that had reached finality, which is impermissible. The enforcement proceedings were based on mediation outcomes, but the applicants had no contractual nexus with the municipality or the MEC, and…

Source excerpt

• Vexatious Litigation
• Leave To Institute Proceedings
• Public Protector Remedial Action
• Municipal Tender Disputes
• Prescription Of Claims
• Joinder And Locus Standi

Shube v Road Accident Fund (2754/2019)

Shube v Road Accident Fund (2754/2019) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 24 (31 March 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

2754/2019

Judge

Mashile

The High Court held that the plaintiff’s RAF claim had prescribed because it was invalid from inception and the required statutory documents were not properly served.

• Road Accident Fund Act
• Prescription Of Claims
• Statutory Compliance
• Personal Injury
• Special Plea
• Proof Of Service

Nooe v Minister of Police and Another (2021/7425)

Nooe v Minister of Police and Another (2021/7425) [2025] ZAGPJHC 219 (4 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/7425

Judge

Thupaatlase

The High Court granted leave to appeal over when a debt becomes due for notice under the Organs of State Act in an unlawful arrest and detention claim.

• Institution Of Legal Proceedings Against Organs Of State Act
• Unlawful Arrest
• Malicious Prosecution
• Prescription Of Claims
• Leave-to-appeal
• Unlawful-arrest

Risimati Steven Construction CC v University of Venda (1872/2023)

Risimati Steven Construction CC v University of Venda (1872/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 32 (20 February 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

1872/2023

Judge

Pillay

The High Court dismissed an application to set aside a combined summons as an irregular step, finding Rule 30/30A non-compliance and no bar from arbitration.

• Irregular Proceedings
• Arbitration Agreement
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Rule 30 And 30a Compliance
• Contractual Dispute
• Prescription Of Claims

Johan Theron Makelaars CC and Another v Chairperson for Office of Ombud and Others (72880/2019)

Johan Theron Makelaars CC and Another v Chairperson for Office of Ombud and Others (72880/2019) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1361 (24 December 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

72880/2019

Judge

K La M Manamela

High Court review of FAIS Ombud and Tribunal decisions over Sharemax investment complaints, setting aside most reimbursement and cession orders for unfairness and legal error.

• Judicial Review Under Paja
• Fais Act Compliance
• Ombud Jurisdiction
• Prescription Of Claims
• Procedural Fairness
• Financial Services Provider Liability