Attorney Michael de Broglio on: South Africa, Law, Politics, Attorneys, Sport, Photography, Technology, Gadgets, Media, Crime, Road Accidents Fund,
Divorce, Maintenance, Personal Injury, Medical Negligence
The Supreme Court of Appeal recently ruled on the issue of serious injuries. The judgment, and it is important for non-attorneys to know that judgments in law is spelt without two e’s – in other words, some people incorrectly spell it “judgement” – but the correct spelling is “judgment”.
The judgment itself was not what attorneys were hoping for and essentially it allows the Road Accident Fund at almost any time to now object to a serious injury form that is lodged with them, even if that is halfway through the Court process. There is no time limit, according to the SCA, as to when they can object by, and quite unusually they have made it the job of the attorneys representing the injured party to write reminder letters to the Road Accident Fund, and if those don’t work, to bring Court applications against them in terms of PAJA. That of course is going to lead to considerably more Court applications in Court and ultimately a lot more expenses for the Road Accident Fund to pay. It is somewhat of a pity that the Road Accident Fund is not the world’s greatest responders to correspondence, and that it is now being made the job of the plaintiff attorneys to remind the Road Accident Fund that they have to respond to the serious injury lodgement and decide whether or not they concede that it is a serious injury – something that they normally refuse to do. If they don’t then respond to those reminders letters, one will need to bring a Court application to compel them to respond and of course they will end up paying the costs of that application as well as the advocate’s fees for launching the application in the High Court but it is certainly going to add to the already expensive amounts of legal work involved in these types of matters. The judgment is known as the Lebeko judgment and a copy of it can be downloaded here.
Posted by Michael de Broglio on Tuesday 04-Dec-12
Post a Comment
Comments
Tans said:
on Wednesday 12-Dec-12 05:20 AM
Besides the poor quality of the judgment - both in substance and form - the judgment lacks rationality and is truly absymal. The logic of the court is astounding and to place additional obligations on the plaintiff, when it is the Fund that cannot do its job properly, is simply farcical. Unfortunately, one starts to wonder if the courts are attempting to save face for all government departments and organs, who are, truth be told, shocking and incompetent.
Robyn said:
on Wednesday 05-Dec-12 06:10 AM
I don't understand this judgment. The RAF will end up paying more in the end because as you say here, they don't respond to correspondence. Then they will have more to moan about and they will claim they are bankrupt like they always do with all of the new costs they have to pay. They're supposed to be helping innocent people here and it seems to me like they are trying in every possible way NOT to do their job. I just can't grasp it.
Liesl said:
on Tuesday 04-Dec-12 04:38 PM
The RAF certainly knows how to generate unnecessary work and legal costs, while they themselves claim that they always endeavour to keep legal fees as low as possible. They also try and encourage the public to not involve attorneys as they are for the public and capable of dealing with applications themselves. I feel sorry for the people out there who are just none-the-wiser.
Anna said:
on Tuesday 04-Dec-12 04:20 PM
The Lebeko judgment is disappointing and provides yet another hurdle for the Plaintiff to overcome in order to prove the injuries that he/she innocently sustained whilst involved in an accident due to the negligence of another person. One has to wonder if these kinds of judgment are not being made to deter Plaintiffs from litigating against the Road Accident Fund at all. While certain injuries cannot be anything other than serious injuries such as paraplegia, quadriplegia, severe brain injuries and amputations, we will, no doubt, have to launch application after application to enlist some sort of response from the defendant's attorneys as to their thoughts on the seriousness of the injuries incurred. It irks me to think of all the senseless wasted costs that will be paid out by the Road Accident Fund for these applications when these monies could be used to compensate more Plaintiffs for their injuries
Anna said:
on Tuesday 04-Dec-12 04:20 PM
The Lebeko judgment is disappointing and provides yet another hurdle for the Plaintiff to overcome in order to prove the injuries that he/she innocently sustained whilst involved in an accident due to the negligence of another person. One has to wonder if these kinds of judgment are not being made to deter Plaintiffs from litigating against the Road Accident Fund at all. While certain injuries cannot be anything other than serious injuries such as paraplegia, quadriplegia, severe brain injuries and amputations, we will, no doubt, have to launch application after application to enlist some sort of response from the defendant's attorneys as to their thoughts on the seriousness of the injuries incurred. It irks me to think of all the senseless wasted costs that will be paid out by the Road Accident Fund for these applications when these monies could be used to compensate more Plaintiffs for their injuries
Anna said:
on Tuesday 04-Dec-12 04:20 PM
The Lebeko judgment is disappointing and provides yet another hurdle for the Plaintiff to overcome in order to prove the injuries that he/she innocently sustained whilst involved in an accident due to the negligence of another person. One has to wonder if these kinds of judgment are not being made to deter Plaintiffs from litigating against the Road Accident Fund at all. While certain injuries cannot be anything other than serious injuries such as paraplegia, quadriplegia, severe brain injuries and amputations, we will, no doubt, have to launch application after application to enlist some sort of response from the defendant's attorneys as to their thoughts on the seriousness of the injuries incurred. It irks me to think of all the senseless wasted costs that will be paid out by the Road Accident Fund for these applications when these monies could be used to compensate more Plaintiffs for their injuries
Jessica said:
on Tuesday 04-Dec-12 04:13 PM
And people worry that the RAF have no money, yet they making more work which means they will have to pay more.
Johannesburg based attorney specializing in personal injury matters including Road Accident Fund claims and medical negligence matters. My interests include golf, reading and the internet and the way it is constantly developing. I have a passion for life and a desire for less stress!
