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
Engelbrecht v Road Accident Fund and Another (3701/03) [2008] ZAWCHC 51 (2 August 2008)
High Court held that Regulation 2(1)(c) of the RAF Act was constitutional and that non-compliance was fatal to the plaintiff’s hit-and-run claim.
Thugwana v Road Accident Fund (530/04) [2005] ZASCA 141; [2006] 2 All SA 135 (SCA); 2006 (2) SA 616 (SCA) (30 November 2005)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that regulation 2(1)(c) of the Road Accident Fund Act imposes a substantive requirement for liability, namely the submission of an affidavit to the police within the prescribed period. Non-compliance with this requirement is fatal to the claim. Section 24(5) only regulates procedural aspects and cannot cure substantive defects arising from failure to comply with regulation 2(1)(c). The court endorsed the reasoning in Krischke v Road Accident Fund, confirming that section 24(5) does not revive claims that have not arisen due to non-compliance with substantive r…
Source excerpt
Explore more
