Buthelezi v Road Accident Fund (17468/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 351 (12 April 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
17468/2021
Judge
Mooki
The court dismissed a Road Accident Fund claim where the plaintiff failed to plead specific injuries or prove loss, and the expert reports were unreliable.
Ntaopane v Road Accident Fund (2405/2019) [2023] ZAFSHC 465 (29 November 2023)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
2405/2019
Judge
M.T. Jordaan
The High Court held that the Road Accident Fund could not refuse payment of undisputed medical expenses merely because an original voucher was unavailable.
Razzmatazz Civil (Pty) Ltd and Another v MEC: Free State Provincial Government: Department of Police, Roads and Transport (2547/2019) [2023] ZAFSHC 375 (6 October 2023)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
2547/2019
Judge
Daniso
The High Court held the contractor was entitled to compensation for idle plant under the GCC after suspension of roadworks, but not for unproved OHS costs.
Teddybear Consulting Trust T/A Blue Bay Food Stop v Deysel and Another (P343/13) [2014] ZAECPEHC 27 (29 April 2014)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Case number
P343/13
Judge
R G Lagrange
The Labour Court dismissed an unopposed damages claim for breach of an employment contract because the applicant’s figures and legal basis were insufficiently proved.
Walker v Santam Limited and Others (410/08) [2009] ZASCA 56; 2009 (6) SA 224 (SCA) ; [2009] 4 All SA 60 (SCA) (28 May 2009)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
410/08
Judges
Nugent, Kroon, Griesel
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant had proved his entitlement to indemnity under the insurance contract, having established the occurrence of the insured event and the quantum of his loss. The appellant's evidence regarding the sale of the wreck was unchallenged and demonstrated that he took reasonable steps to minimise his loss. The respondents failed to show that a better price could have been obtained or that the appellant acted unreasonably. The court distinguished the present contractual claim from the delictual claim in Erasmus v Davis, finding that the requirements for…