Potgieter v Road Accident Fund (2416/2005)
Potgieter v Road Accident Fund (2416/2005) [2012] ZAECPEHC 46 (31 May 2012)
The court held that the defendant is entitled under Rule 36(2) and (5) to require the plaintiff to undergo a second and final medical examination by its chosen clinical psychologist, as only one prior examination at the defendant's instance has occurred. The plaintiff's objections, including prior examinations by his own experts and other specialists, do not count towards the defendant's entitlement under the Rules. The court found that the proposed examination does not constitute an unreasonable invasion of the plaintiff's constitutional rights, as such rights may be limited in the interests…
Source excerpt
- Medical Examination
- Road Accident Fund Act
- Bodily Injury Compensation
- Rule 36 Procedure