• Law Reports
  • Baloyi v Road Accident Fund (3959/18) [2025] ZAGPPHC …

Baloyi v Road Accident Fund (3959/18) [2025] ZAGPPHC 665 (27 June 2025)

43 Reportability
Trusts and Estates
View PDF SAFLII Source
Share WhatsApp LinkedIn X Email

Brief Summary

Curatorship — Appointment of curator ad litem — Plaintiff with traumatic brain injury unable to manage own affairs — Court appoints independent curator to assist Plaintiff in legal proceedings — Curator tasked with assessing Plaintiff's financial management ability and legal representation suitability.

Comprehensive Summary

Case Note


Baloyi Vincent Attholane v Road Accident Fund

Case Number: 3959/18

Date: 27 June 2025


Reportability


This case is not reportable as it does not set a precedent or address significant legal principles that would be of interest to other judges. However, it highlights important issues regarding the capacity of individuals with severe brain injuries to manage their legal affairs and the necessity of appointing a curator ad litem in such circumstances.


Cases Cited


No specific cases were cited in the judgment.


Legislation Cited


No specific legislation was referenced in the judgment.


Rules of Court Cited


No specific rules of court were cited in the judgment.


HEADNOTE


Summary


The case involves a claim by Baloyi Vincent Attholane against the Road Accident Fund for damages exceeding R10 million due to a traumatic brain injury. The court had to consider the plaintiff's ability to manage his own affairs and provide instructions to his legal representatives, ultimately leading to the appointment of a curator ad litem to assist him.


Key Issues


The key legal issues addressed in this case include the plaintiff's mental capacity to instruct legal counsel, the validity of a proposed settlement, and the necessity of appointing a curator to protect the plaintiff's interests.


Held


The court held that due to the plaintiff's severe cognitive impairments, it was necessary to appoint an independent curator ad litem to assist him in managing his legal affairs and to report back to the court on various matters related to the case.


THE FACTS


The plaintiff, Baloyi Vincent Attholane, sustained a traumatic brain injury, which rendered him functionally illiterate and unable to manage his own affairs. Expert reports indicated that he was forgetful, unable to count, and mentally unstable. Despite these impairments, the plaintiff had attested to affidavits and purported to instruct his legal team. However, the court found that he could not sensibly provide instructions, leading to concerns about the management of his claim and the validity of a proposed settlement of R350,000.


THE ISSUES


The court had to decide whether the plaintiff was capable of managing his own financial affairs and providing instructions to his legal representatives. Additionally, the court needed to assess the appropriateness of the proposed settlement and the necessity of appointing a curator ad litem to protect the plaintiff's interests.


ANALYSIS


The court's analysis focused on the plaintiff's cognitive impairments and the implications for his ability to engage in legal proceedings. The expert reports provided compelling evidence of the plaintiff's mental state, which raised significant concerns about his capacity to make informed decisions regarding his claim. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring that vulnerable individuals are adequately represented and protected in legal matters, particularly when substantial sums of money are at stake.


REMEDY


The court ordered the appointment of a curator ad litem to assist the plaintiff in managing his legal affairs. The curator is tasked with reporting on the plaintiff's ability to manage his finances, the acceptance of the proposed settlement, and the overall conduct of the case. The court also reserved the costs associated with the hearings.


LEGAL PRINCIPLES


The case underscores the principle that individuals with severe cognitive impairments may require the appointment of a curator ad litem to ensure their interests are protected in legal proceedings. It highlights the court's responsibility to safeguard the rights of vulnerable parties and to ensure that they are adequately represented in matters involving significant financial stakes.

SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in
compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA


CASE NUMBER: 3959/18
(1) REPORTABLE: NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3) REVISED.
DATE 27/06/2025
SIGNATURE

In the matter between:

BALOYI VINCENT ATLHOLANE

And

ROAD ACCIDENT FUND


JUDGMENT


DE JAGER AJ

[1] This matter was before me for adjudication on 25 J une 2025 , set down on the
Trial Default Judgement Roll. The claim is for an amount in excess of
R10 000 000.00 (Ten Million Rand).

[2] The expert reports uploaded substantiating the Plaintiff ’s traumatic brain injury
contain several factual statements that the Plaintiff is forgetful, unable to
count, or to be left alone as he gets lost. Family members further report that
the Plaintiff is mentally unstable and spends time with people in the
community who are psychotic.

[3] The expert reports and counsel during argument confirmed that the Plaintiff is
functionally illiterate.

[4] A practi ce note and heads of arguments were filed , these did not deal with the
Plaintiff’s ability to furnish instructions or manage his own affairs.

[5] It appears that merits have not been conceded or adjudicated despite an offer
and acceptance for general damages in the amount of R350 000.00 (Three
Hundred and Fifty Thousand Rand). Counsel was not able to indicate how this
occurred , or even if it is possible.

[6] The Plaintiff , despite the above , attested to affidavits in this matter and
ostensibly instructed his legal team. After deliberation with counsel about the
ability of the Plaintiff to instruct his legal representatives, it was requested that
this matter be removed. The matter stood down to 27 Ju ne 2025.

[7] It appears that subsequent to the appearance on 25 Ju ne 2025 , a proposed
deed of trust, and appointment of a trustee was uploaded. This is a belated
attempt at trying to protect future funds that may be awarded to the Plaintiff, in
circumstances where the Plaintiff on what is currently before Court , cannot
sensibly give instruction to the legal team . This is not acceptable .

[9] I am compelled to appoint an independent curator ad litem to assist the
Plaintiff and report to Court.

[10] Accordingly , the following order is made:

1. That a Curator ad litem is to be appointed in the matter by the acting
Deputy Judge President , N Davis.
2. The Pretoria Society of Advocates, under the leadership of Adv L Haupt
within 5 (five days) of this order nominate a senior advocate, of more than
20 years adequate experience in matters of personal injury to act as
Curator ad litem in this matter on behalf of the Plaintiff.
3. The name of such nominated Curator ad litem to be communicated to the
Honourable Justice N Davis.
4. The nominated Curator ad litem to assist the Plaintiff in this matter with
the powers and duties as set out below.
5. The nominated Curator ad litem is authorised to approach the Acting
Deputy Judge President, alternatively a Judge in chambers to extend the
powers and functions in the event that such powers and functions as set
out is not sufficient.
6. The nominated Curator within 30 court days of today, being 11 August
2025 report to Honourable Justice N Davies in this matter, specifically
regarding the following matters:
6.1 The Plaintiff ’s ability to manage his own financial affairs and take
decisions with regard s to his person ;
6.2 The acceptance of the amount of R350 000.00 (Three Hundred and
Fifty Thousand Rand) as full and final settlement for general
damages in this matter [CASELINES 12 (1)] ;
6.3 How the amount for general damages received by the Plaintiff ’s
attorneys has been utilized ;
6.4 The signed confirmatory affidavit of the Plaintiff dated 24 January
2025 [CASELINES 009:2], given the severity of the brain injury of the
Plaintiff and the reports by experts indicating that the Plaintiff cannot
read;
6.5 The validity of the contingency fee agreement uploaded under
[CASELINES 13] ;
6.6 The suitability of the current legal representation of the Plaintiff to
continue the representation of the Plaintiff in this matter ;
6.7 The costs, if any of the action to date including costs associated with
the appearance on 25 and 27 Ju ne 2025 ;
6.8 The belated (26 Ju ne 2025) uploaded deed of the trust ;
6.9 The further conduct of the current action and any further potential
claims that the Plaintiff may have, including the possible re scission
of the full and final award of R350 000.00 in general damages.
7. The attorneys of record are ordered to provide the curator with copies of
all information and documents relating to the Plaintiff ’s claim.
8. The Plaintiff’s attorneys to attend to the urgent service of this order by
sheriff on the offices of the Pretoria Bar, and via email on
8.1 Adv L Haupt (Pretoria Bar) a[...];
8.2 Office Manager – Petra Jacobs (Pretoria Bar) m[...]
9. The costs of the 25 and 27 Ju ne 2025 is reserved.


J DE JAGER
ACTING JUDGE, THE HIGH COURT
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

Date of hearing : 25 June 2025
Date of Judgment : 27 June 2025
Appearances:
For The Plaintiff : Adv . Brian Matlhape
Instructed by : Chauke J Attorneys Inc
For The Defendant : No Appearances



Back to Law Reports