South Africa Case Law

Cromhout v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund, Santam Beperk v Williams (159/96, 445/96)

Cromhout v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund, Santam Beperk v Williams (159/96, 445/96) [1997] ZASCA 77; [1997] 4 All SA 491 (A) (26 September 1997)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

159/96, 445/96

Judges

Smalberger, Howie, Olivier, Zulman, Streicher

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the 1991 amendment to article 47 of the Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund agreement did not operate retroactively. The amendment created a new right for pedestrian workmen to claim third party compensation without the previous statutory limitation, but this right only applied to accidents occurring after the effective date of the amendment. The Court found no express or implied intention in the language of the amendment to apply it to claims arising before 1 November 1991. Applying the general presumption against retroactivity, the Court concluded…

Source excerpt

• Statutory Interpretation
• Retroactivity Of Legislation
• Workmens Compensation
• Third Party Liability
• Motor Vehicle Accident Fund

Constantia Insurance Company Ltd. v Nohamba (45/86)

Constantia Insurance Company Ltd. v Nohamba (45/86) [1986] ZASCA 43; [1986] 2 All SA 312 (A) (27 March 1986)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

45/86

Judges

Corbett, Joubert, Boshoff, Galgut, Nicholas

The court held that inaccuracies in a motor vehicle insurance claim form did not defeat the claim because the form substantially complied with the statute.

• Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act
• Substantial Compliance
• Workmens Compensation
• Material Inaccuracy
• Waiver Of Rights
• Substantial-compliance