About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2016
>>
[2016] ZAGPPHC 959
|
|
Naude v Road Accident Fund (69514/2013) [2016] ZAGPPHC 959 (22 August 2016)
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTE
N
G
DIVI
S
I
ON,PRETORIA)
14/9/16
Case
N
o: 69514
1
1
3
In
the matter between:
J
D
NAUDE
Plaintiff
and
THE
ROAD ACC
I
DENT
FUND
Defendant
Date
of Hearing: 22 August 2016
Date
of Judgment:
JUDGMENT
BARNES
AJ
1.
This is a judgment In respect of the merits portion of a trial
arising out of a motor vehicle accident, the Court having ruled
that
the matter was not ready to proceed in respect of quantum.
2.
It was not disputed by the Defendant that the Plaintiff, Mr Johannes
Naude, was Involved in a motor vehicle accident on 30 April
2012 at
approximately 21h45 on C R Swart Drive, Waverley, Pretoria while
driving a Nissan tow truck with registration number MHM
311 GP.
3.
The Plaintiff gave evidence as did his brother, Mr Jacob Naude, who
witnessed the accident.
4.
The Plaintiff testified that he and his brother,both tow truck
drivers, had left an accident scene on Duncan street in Hatfield
and
were on route to the Harvey Miller circle via C R Swart Drive in
Waverley. The Plaintiff and his brother were driving alongside
one
another, the Plaintiff in the left hand lane and his brother in the
right hand lane. The brothers were on their way to the
Harvey Miller
circle where they intended to wait until their services were
required. They were travelling fairly slowly, in the
region of 50km
per hour.
5.
The Plaintiff became aware of a V W Polo travelling at speed behind
him and flashing its lights. The Plaintiff decided to move
into the
right hand lane in front of his brother's vehicle in order to allow
the Polo to pass. The Plaintiff indicated his intention
to do so. As
the Plaintiff commenced moving into the right hand lane, the Polo
passed the Plaintiff and then suddenly swerved to
the right, in front
of the Plaintiff a vehicle.
6.
The Plaintiff, in order to avoid a collision with the Polo and his
brother's vehicle, swerved sharply to the right. In the process
the
Plaintiff lost control of his vehicle and collided with a tree in the
traffic median in the centre of the road. The Polo did
not stop.
7.
The Plaintiff's brother corroborated his version in all material
respects. The Plaintiffs version was not seriously challenged
in
cross examination. In particular, it was not contested that the Polo
suddenly swerved in front of the Plaintiff's vehicle. Nor
was it
contested that there was nothing the Plaintiff could have done to
avoid the collision, other than swerve to the right as
he did.
Indeed, the overwhelming likelihood, had the Plaintiff not swerved to
the right, is that he would have collided with the
Polo, his
brother's vehicle or both. This too was uncontested.
8.
The evidence therefore clearly establishes,on a balance of
probabilities, that the accident was caused by the sole negligence
of
the driver of the
Polo.
In the circumstances, the Defendant is liable to pay 100% of the
Plaintiff's proved damages.
9.
I accordingly make the following order:
9.1
On the merits, the Plaintiffs claim for 100% (one hundred percent) of
damages (the
quantum of which remains to be proved), to be paid by
the Defendant, is upheld.
9.2
The Defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the trial.
______________________________
BARNES
AJ
Appearances:
For
the Plaintiff: Adv P Vermeulen Instructed by Hagerman &
Associates
For
the Defendant Adv N Soviti-Zwadela instructed by Nozuka Nxusano Inc