! IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 20132/2021
(1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO
(2) OF IN?@REST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) Bese: YES/NO
(TJ/oT/as
(7
In the matter between:
| SANGA LANGISON APPLICANT/ PLAINTIFF
and
ROAD ACCIDENT FUND RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT — LEAVE TO APPEAL
JUDGEMENT: 29 MAY 2025
LEAVE TO APPEAL : 14 JULY 2025
DELIVERED: 17 JULY 2025
'
2
CORAM: NTHAMBELENI AJ .
INTRODUCTION
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal,
alternatively the Full Bench of this Division, in terms of Section 17(1) of the
Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 against the judgement | delivered in this matter
on 29 May 2025 (the judgement “a quo’).
[2] In the judgement a quo, the matter was a Road Accident Fund claim brought
by the applicant who was the plaintiff. The appeal is brought against the award
of general damages in the amount of R 650,000.00 that the court a quo
handed.
LISTED GROUNDS OF APPEAL
[3] The first ground was the challenge on the award of general damages in the
amount of R 650,000.00 and the second ground was not awarding generals
in the amount of R 1,500,000.00 as sought by the applicant/plaintiff.
[4] The third ground for leave was cited as not giving sufficient consideration to
the evidence of Dr. Kelly (Neurosurgeon) that the plaintiff sustained a mild
traumatic brain injury.
[5] Fourth ground in finding that the plaintiff, having sustained, inter alia, a fracture
of the right femur, a fracture of maxilla bone, severe permanent disfiguring
3
scarring and a mild traumatic brain injury, is not entitled to award in respect of
general damages in excess of R 650,000.00.
[6] The fifth ground raised in not finding that the plaintiff, having sustained inter
alia, a fracture of the right femur, a fracture of the left maxilla bone, severe
disfiguring scarring, and a mild traumatic brain injury, is entitled to an award
for general damages in the amount of R 1,500 000.00.
[7] The sixth ground raised is in not finding that the authority of Masemola v Road
Accident Fund' was authority for the award of R 1,500,000.00 in general
damages, and lastly, not sufficiently considering the combined effect of all the
plaintiffs injuries as referred to on the fourth ground, in the determination of
the amount of the award of the plaintiff's general damages.
TEST FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN TERMS OF THE RULES AND CASE LAW
[8] Therefore, the pertinent question to ask is whether the applicant has satisfied
the test for leave to appeal in this matter based on the grounds as set out in
his application for leave to appeal. In order to answer that question, it is
important to look at the test in leave to appeal matters.
[9] Rule 49 of the Uniform Rules of Court dictates the form and process of an
application for leave to appeal and the substantive law pertaining thereto is to
be found in the provisions of section 17 of the Superior Court Act 10 of 2013.
1 2023 ZAGPPHC 553; 172336/2017 (23 July 2023).