South Africa Case Law

Shabalala v Road Accident Fund (2021/29064; 2021/58021)

Shabalala v Road Accident Fund (2021/29064; 2021/58021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 66 (24 January 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/29064; 2021/58021

Judge

Weideman AJ

The court held that the orders previously granted, which deemed injuries serious if the Road Accident Fund failed to decide within 10 days, were incorrect and conflicted with the Supreme Court of Appeal's decision in Mpahla v RAF. The RAF's failure to comply with statutory and court-ordered obligations does not result in a deemed acceptance of serious injury. Instead, the appropriate remedy is for the plaintiff to seek judicial review under PAJA, allowing the court to substitute its own decision for that of the RAF. The court exercised its power under PAJA to reject the serious injury assessm…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Mandamus
• Default Judgment

Lombard v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others - Order (A187/2023)

Lombard v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others - Order (A187/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 146 (20 May 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A187/2023

Judges

JP Daffue, I van Rhyn

The High Court reviewed and set aside an appeal tribunal decision classifying the applicant’s injuries as non-serious, and sent the dispute back for reconsideration.

• Review Of Administrative Action
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Narrative Test Injury Classification
• Administrative-law
• Judicial-review
• Road-accident-fund

Matshogo v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Another (061644/2023)

Matshogo v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Another (061644/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 35 (18 January 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

061644/2023

Judge

E N B Khwinana

The court found that the applicant instituted the review application within the prescribed 180-day period under PAJA, and therefore condonation was not required. The respondents failed to deliver the record and reasons for the administrative decision, which is essential for the applicant to challenge the classification of his injuries. The court emphasized the necessity of transparency and access to the record for a fair review process. The applicant is entitled to receive the full record and reasons, and may amplify his application upon receipt. Costs are awarded to the applicant. The court…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review
• Condonation
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Record Disclosure
• Serious Injury Assessment

Pereko v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (9712/2018)

Pereko v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (9712/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 590 (16 October 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

9712/2018

Judge

GW Girdwood

The court held that the regulations governing the Road Accident Fund Appeal Tribunal require only that findings be communicated to the parties, not reasons, unless a request is made under section 5 of PAJA. The previous judgments of the division requiring reasons to accompany findings were found to be clearly wrong. The applicant did not request reasons under PAJA, and the tribunal's answering affidavit provided sufficient explanation of the process and consideration of the evidence. The tribunal applied its expertise, considered all relevant reports, and properly applied the narrative test.…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Judicial Review
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Reasons For Administrative Action

Boqwana v Road Accident Fund Appeal Tribunal and Others (3823/2018)

Boqwana v Road Accident Fund Appeal Tribunal and Others (3823/2018) [2019] ZAECMHC 67 (12 November 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

3823/2018

Judge

Zono

High Court review set aside a RAF Appeal Tribunal decision rejecting a serious-injury appeal, held the decision irrational, and remitted the matter for reconsideration.

• Judicial Review
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Costs Award
• Principle Of Legality
• Judicial-review

Kleinhans v Registrar of the Health Professions of Council of South Africa and Others (4200/2017)

Kleinhans v Registrar of the Health Professions of Council of South Africa and Others (4200/2017) [2019] ZAECPEHC 13 (26 March 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

4200/2017

Judge

NG Beshe

High Court review of a Road Accident Fund Appeal Tribunal decision was dismissed. The court held that adequate reasons were given and the tribunal’s decision was rational.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Adequacy Of Reasons
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Tribunal Composition
• Administrative-law

Maluleke v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (96672/16)

Maluleke v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (96672/16) [2019] ZAGPPHC 66 (14 February 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

96672/16

Judge

Makhuvele

The court found that the applicant was notified of the Appeal Tribunal's composition and did not object, as permitted by the regulations. The Tribunal's reference to the AMA Guides as a starting point for assessing permanent injury was not an error of law. The consideration of the Van den Bout report was not irregular, as it formed the basis for the RAF's rejection and the subsequent appeal. The applicant's arguments regarding procedural irregularities were not substantiated, and the Tribunal's process complied with the legislative framework. Accordingly, the application for review was dismis…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Procedural Fairness
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Road Accident Fund Regulations

Maluleke v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (96672/16)

Maluleke v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (96672/16) [2018] ZAGPPHC 967 (14 December 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

96672/16

Judge

Makhuvele

The court found that the applicant was notified of the Appeal Tribunal's composition and had the opportunity to object, which she did not exercise. The Tribunal's consideration of the AMA Guides and the narrative test was not an error of law, as the guides provide a starting point for assessing the permanence of injury. The reference to the report of Van den Bout was not procedurally unfair, as it formed the basis for the RAF's rejection and the subsequent appeal. The applicant's allegations of procedural irregularity were not substantiated, and the Tribunal's process complied with the releva…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Procedural Fairness

Health Profession Council of South Africa and Others v Ndumo and Another (48876/17)

Health Profession Council of South Africa and Others v Ndumo and Another (48876/17) [2018] ZAGPPHC 426 (22 June 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

48876/17

Judge

Senyatsi

The High Court dismissed a Rule 30A challenge to a special power of attorney, holding it sufficiently authorised the attorneys to bring a RAF review application.

• Rule 7 Authority To Act
• Rule 30a Non Compliance
• Power Of Attorney
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Rule-30a
• Rule-7

Maimane v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Another (2014/40325)

Maimane v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Another (2014/40325) [2017] ZAGPJHC 300 (29 September 2017)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2014/40325

Judge

M A Makume

High Court review of a RAF serious-injury appeal decision failed. The court held the Tribunal considered the written medical reports and no reviewable irregularity was shown.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Road Accident Fund Regulations
• Procedural Fairness
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Administrative-law
• Pa-ja