About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2025
>>
[2025] ZAGPJHC 293
|
|
Mokgaetjie v Road Accident Fund (61400/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 293 (27 February 2025)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION,
JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO
: 61400/2023
DATE
:
27-02-2025
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO.
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO.
(3)
REVISED.
In
the matter between
MATLOU
LINAH MOKGAETJIE
Plaintiff
and
ROAD ACCIDENT
FUND
Defendant
JUDGMENT
WEIDEMAN,
AJ
:
This matter was a loss of support
claim instituted on behalf of one of the children of a father who
passed away in an accident which
occurred on the 8
th
of
February 2020. The child’s date of birth is the 17
th
of August 2017.
The matter had been standing down
since Tuesday to allow the plaintiff to obtain clarity on the status
of the claims of the widow
and the deceased’s five other
children. From the available documentation it appeared that the
deceased fathered six children,
albeit that the documentation to hand
does not confirm whether all of the children were born out of his
relationship with the plaintiff
in this matter.
When the matter was called again
today, counsel drew the court’s attention to documentation
which had been uploaded onto Caselines
and which confirm the
settlement of the claims of some of the dependants of the deceased in
this matter. The settlement offer does
however not specify which of
the dependants’ claims were addressed by this offer of
settlement. On Caselines at 09-11, an
offer and acceptance appear,
dated 15 June 2022 and in respect of a claimant by the name of
Masibuku. This offer is in the sum
of R3 987 395.80 but does not
specify which of the dependants’ claims it addressed.
Before this court is an actuarial
report dated 12 May 2022 and which contains a figure of R6 847 324
which represents the total
loss of support claim on behalf of what is
recorded as the deceased’s spouse and his six children. There
is no indication
as to the relationship between this figure and the
amount that had been tendered in respect of some of the other
dependants.
The deceased’s income was
debated with counsel and a question mark was raised over the amount
of R88 000 per month emanating
from a 2017 payslip and which amount
was used for the actuarial calculation in the matter
in casu.
Counsel drew my attention to a report
that had been uploaded onto Caselines and which is to be read in
conjunction with the offer
of settlement that is contained on
CaseLines 08-11.
This document seems to
have been generated for the purpose of the settlement of the Masibuko
claims.
The income figure per month in that
document correlates well with the figure utilised in the actuarial
calculation in the matter
to hand. Counsel did not draw the court’s
attention to any documentation and in reading the case, the court did
not come
across any documentation which could motivate for an
assumption that Lethabo (the child to whom this matter relates) would
have
been supported to age 21. In the circumstances the standard
approach of dependency until age 18 must apply.
Turning to the calculation itself,
there is no reason to deviate from the figures as produced by the
actuary.
My order is therefore as follows:
1. The defendant is liable
to the plaintiff in respect of such damages as the plaintiff may be
able to substantiate;
2. The defendant shall pay
the plaintiff the sum of R837 760 in respect of loss of support;
3. The plaintiff is
entitled to claim party-and-party costs as taxed or agreed from the
defendant. Counsels’ fees
to be on Scale B.
WEIDEMAN, AJ
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
DATE
:
……………….