South Africa Case Law

Taaibos v Road Accident Fund (2211/2023)

Taaibos v Road Accident Fund (2211/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 187 (20 June 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2211/2023

Judge

PJ Loubser

The plaintiff's claim prescribed because summons was served more than five years after the accident, as required by Section 23(3) of the Road Accident Fund Act. The plaintiff did not plead waiver or breach of duty of care, nor did he file a replication or present evidence to support such contentions. The facts of Lottering v Chief Executive Officer of the Road Accident Fund N.O. and Another are materially different, as in that case, waiver and breach of duty of care were properly pleaded and substantiated. The court cannot consider issues not raised in the pleadings. There is no legal basis f…

Source excerpt

• Prescription
• Road Accident Fund Act
• Special Plea
• Waiver Of Prescription
• Duty Of Care

Mdeyide v Road Accident Fund (EL91/2004)

Mdeyide v Road Accident Fund (EL91/2004) [2006] ZAECHC 125 (3 October 2006)

Court

High Courts - Eastern Cape

Case number

EL91/2004

Judge

S V Notshe

The court dismissed a Road Accident Fund special plea, holding that section 23(1) unconstitutionally limited access to courts by ignoring knowledge and condonation.

• Prescription
• Road Accident Fund Act
• Access To Court
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Waiver Of Prescription
• Condonation

Abbass v Allianz Insurance Ltd. (222/88)

Abbass v Allianz Insurance Ltd. (222/88) [1989] ZASCA 109 (21 September 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

222/88

Judges

Joubert, Botha, Vivier, Eksteen, Nicholas

The court held that section 24(2) of the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act applies only to the statutory prescription period, not a privately extended one.

• Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act
• Prescription Of Claims
• Waiver Of Prescription
• Leave To Serve Process
• Insurance-law
• Prescription