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
De Koker v Road Accident Fund (6409/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 59 (14 February 2025)
The High Court held the Road Accident Fund 100% liable after a rear-end collision involving the plaintiff’s motorcycle, finding no contributory negligence.
Scheepers v Road Accident Fund (A436/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 579 (28 August 2021)
Appeal dismissed in a Road Accident Fund rear-end collision claim. The court found the appellant failed to rebut the presumption of negligence and proved no negligence by the other drivers.
Auret N.O obo Kieser v Road Accident Fund (14206/2014) [2020] ZAWCHC 192 (28 April 2020)
The court dismissed a RAF claim after finding the motorcycle rider solely caused a rear-end collision at a robot-controlled intersection.
Rakimana v Road Accident Fund (66397/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 412 (30 August 2019)
The High Court held the Road Accident Fund solely liable after a rear-end collision caused by an insured driver’s sudden stop without warning.
Abinero v Road Accident Fund (95211/15) [2019] ZAGPPHC 462 (19 August 2019)
The court held that the plaintiff was solely responsible for a rear-end collision and rejected any contributory negligence by the Road Accident Fund’s insured driver.
Maila v Road Accident Fund (54320/17) [2019] ZAGPPHC 584 (13 August 2019)
The court found that the insured driver failed to take adequate steps to warn following traffic of the stationary bus, including not placing warning triangles at the required distance and not moving the bus to a safer location, despite the presence of a dedicated bus lane. The insured driver's evidence was found unreliable and improbable, especially regarding the activation of hazard lights and the placement of warning signs. Independent witnesses corroborated the absence of warning signs and hazard lights. The plaintiff was found to have contributed to the collision by following too closely…
Source excerpt
Grobler v Road Accident Fund (38917-17) [2019] ZAGPJHC 425 (2 July 2019)
Motorcyclist’s claim against the Road Accident Fund was dismissed after the court found he failed to prove negligence by the Audi driver.
Mahlokoane v Road Accident Fund (36670/2017) [2018] ZAGPJHC 707 (28 November 2018)
The High Court held the Road Accident Fund wholly liable after a rear-end collision on the N14. The plaintiff’s version was uncontested and no contributory negligence was proved.
Kotsinkwa v Road Accident Fund (55813/2014) [2018] ZAGPPHC 445 (10 May 2018)
The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving that the insured driver was the cause of the collision. The plaintiff's evidence was inconsistent and unconvincing, particularly regarding the sequence of events and the affidavit corrections. The defendant's witnesses were credible and their version was supported by probabilities: the plaintiff was driving at excessive speed and failed to maintain a safe following distance, resulting in a rear-end collision. There was no evidence of negligence or contributory negligence by the insured driver. The claim was dismissed w…
Source excerpt
Ninteretse v Road Accident Fund (29586/13) [2018] ZAGPPHC 439 (2 February 2018)
A rear-end collision claim against the Road Accident Fund was dismissed after the court found the plaintiff solely negligent for failing to keep a proper lookout and safe following distance.
Explore more
