SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document
in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO. 032948/22
(1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED
12/12/2025
In the matter between:
BOOI XOLISWA Plaintiff
and
ROAD ACCIDENT FUND Defendant
___________________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
___________________________________________________________________
BHOOLA AJ,
Introduction
[1] The plaintiff, Mr Booi Xoliswa, institutes action against the Road Accident
Fund (RAF) seeking damages arising from a motor vehicle collision which occurred
on 1 November 2021, near Mfula Street, Extension 9, Germiston, Gauteng Province.
[2] The relief sought against the RAF includes
2.1 the aspect of liability which has become resolved between the parties
2
2.2 an undertaking for future medical/hospital expenses in terms of section
17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996 (“the Act”)
2.3 compensation for past and future loss of earnings.
2,4 compensation for general damages,
[3] The summons was served on the defendant on 19 March 2025. The dies for
filing a notice of intention to defend had expired and the plaintiff proceeds by way of
default judgment, read with Rule 38(2) of the Uniform Rules.
[4] The parties have reached a settlement agreement, which they request to be
made an order of court.
Legal Principles
[5] The Constitutional Court in Eke v Parsons 1 established that a settlement
agreement may be made an order of court if:
(a) litigation is pending;
(b) the agreement relates directly to the dispute between the parties; and
(c) the agreement is competent and proper, serving the interests of justice.
[6] In RAF matters, the Supreme Court of Appeal has confirmed that once
litigation is pending, a settlement agreement resolving the dispute should ordinarily
be made an order of court, unless it is incompetent or contrary to public policy.2
1 (CCT214/14) [2015] ZACC 30; 2015 (11) BCLR 1319 (CC); 2016 (3) SA 37 (CC) (29 September 2015)
2 PM obo TM v Road Accident Fund [2019] ZASCA 97
3
[7] More recently, the Constitutional Court in Mafisa v Road Accident Fund 3
emphasised that courts must respect the terms agreed by the parties and may not
rewrite them.
[8] The present settlement agreement regulates liability at 80% in favour of the
plaintiff, quantifies damages for loss of earnings, provides for an undertaking in
terms of section 17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996, postpones
general damages sine die, and deals with costs. It is directly connected to the
dispute, lawful in its terms, and consistent with the statutory framework.
Conclusion
[6] I am satisfied that the agreement meets the criteria set out in Eke v Parsons
4
and subsequent RAF authorities. It is therefore competent and proper to make the
settlement agreement an order of court.
Order
[7] As a result, I make the following order-:
1. The application in terms of Rule 38(2) is granted.
2. The settlement agreement entered into by agreement between the
parties, is made an order of marked “X”.
__________________________
CB. BHOOLA
Acting Judge of the High Court
Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg
3 [2024] ZACC [4]
4 (CCT 156/22) [2024] ZACC 4; 2024 (6) BCLR 805 (CC); 2024 (4) SA 426 (CC) (25 April 2024)
4
Delivered: This judgment was prepared and authored by the Judge whose name
is reflected on 11 December 2025 and is handed down electronically by circulation to
the parties/their legal representatives by e mail and by uploading it to the electronic
file of this matter on CaseLines. The date for hand- down is deemed to be 11
December 2025.
APPEARANCES
Date of hearing: 21 October 2025
Date of judgment: 12 December 2025
For the plaintiff: Adv. N Davidson
(Tel: 082 498 2567)
For the Defendant: P Makatini
(Tel: 072 452 7012)
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA X
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG 12/12/2024
CASE NO: 32948/22
IN JOHANNESBURG ON THIS THE 21st OF OCTOBER 2025
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE BHOOLA A. J.
In the matter between:
BOOI, XOLISWA PLAINTIFF
and
ROAD ACCIDENT FUND DEFENDANT
_________________________________________________________________
COURT ORDER
__________________________________________________________________
By agreement between the parties, and by order of the above Honourable Court, the
following order is made: -
1. The Defendant is liable for 80% of the Plaintiff’s agreed or proven damages.
6
2. The Defendant is ordered to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of R 229 427.48
(TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY-NINE THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED AND
TWENTY-SEVEN RAND AND FORTY- EIGHT CENTS) in respect of the
Plaintiff’s claim for Loss of Earnings , by payment to the Plaintiff’s Attorneys of
record within 180 days, by payment into their trust account, details as follows:
M[…] E[…] D[…] A[…] Trust Account
F[…] N[…] B[…], R[…] Branch
Account Number: 6[…]
Branch Code: 2[…].
3. The Defendant is ordered to furnish the Plaintiff with an Undertaking in terms
of Section 17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act, 56 of 1996, for the costs of
the future accommodation of the Plaintiff in a hospital or nursing home or
treatment of or rendering of a service or supplying of goods to her arising out
of the injuries sustained by her in the motor vehicle collision of 1 November
2021, after such costs have been incurred and upon proof thereof, limited to
80%.
4. Interest a tempore-morae calculated in accordance with the Prescribed Rate
of Interest Act 55 of 1975 shall accrue on the amount referred to in paragraph
2 above calculated from 14 calender days after date of this order to date of
payment.
5. The Plaintiff’s claim for general damages is to be referred to the HPCSA and
is postponed sine die , together with the Plaintiff’s claim for past medical and
hospital expenses.
7
6. That the Defendant will pay the agreed or taxed party and party High Court
costs of the action in respect of both merits and quantum on the appropriate
scale, being that of scale B, subject to the discretion of the Taxing Master, up
to and including the date on which this draft is made an order of the above
Honourable Court, such costs to include:-
6.1 the costs attendant upon the obtaining of payment of the capital
amount referred to in paragraph 2 above;
6.2 the costs of and subsequent to the appointment of counsel, including
but no limited to the following: for trial, including counsel’s full day fee,
preparation and drafting of the heads of argument and practice note;
6.3 the costs of all medico- legal, radiological, actuarial and addendum
reports and/or forms obtained and in the Plaintiff’s bundle, but not
limited to the following: Dr. Scher, Dr. Sneider, Dr. Makua, Ms. da
Costa, Ms. Fletcher, Ms. Leibowitz and Mr. Loots, if any as may be
agreed or allowed by the Taxing Master;
6.4 the reasonable costs / travelling expenses incurred by and on behalf of
the Plaintiff in attending the medico-legal examinations for the Plaintiff;
6.5 the Plaintiff is declared a necessary witness and therefore the Plaintiff’s
reasonable travelling expenses to attend the trial;
6.6 the reasonable travelling expenses for the Plaintiff’s attorney to attend
the trial; and
8
6.7 the Plaintiff’s attorneys shall serve the notice of taxation on the
Defendant’s attorneys and shall allow the Defendant 180 days within
which to make payment of such costs.
7. The Plaintiff has concluded and signed a written Contingency Fee Agreement
whereby the Plaintiff at no stage carried any risk for fees or any portion
thereof.
7.1 The Contingency Fee Agreement complies with the Contingency Fee
Act 66 of 1997.
7.2 In terms of such agreement, the Plaintiff shall be liable for fees equal to
or higher than the normal fee on an attorney and own client scale,
provided that such fees which are higher than the normal fees
(hereinafter referred to as “the success fee”) shall not exceed such
normal fees by more than 100 per cent and provided further that, as
the claim is one sounding in money, the total of any such success fee
payable shall not exceed 25% of the value of the claim, which amount
shall not, for purposes of calculating such excess, include any costs.
BY THE REGISTRAR
For the Plaintiff: N. Davidson (082 498 2567)
For the Defendant: P. Makatini (072 452 7012)