Road Accident Law

28/09/2026

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT HAS NOW CLOSED THE DOOR

08/09/2025

📢New Location, Same Trusted Service - Pretoria Branch Update!

Campbell Attorneys is pleased to announce that our Pretoria branch has relocated to a new office.

📍 New Address:

73 Kariba Street
Lynnwood Glen
Pretoria

We look forward to welcoming you to our new premises and continuing to assist you with all your legal matters

11/11/2023

RAF notice that saw claimants ‘excluded’ declared unconstitutional

Road accident victims whose claims were rejected by the Road Accident Fund between 8 March and 15 June 2021 have six months to resubmit their claims.

20/10/2023

Discovery Health issues warning to RAF over refusal to pay claims

CEO Collins Letsoalo says Road Accident Fund will not resume payments to medical schemes despite Constitutional Court ruling that it must

20/10/2023

Constitutional Court Dismissed RAF's leave to appeal.

Apex court dismisses Road Accident Fund's appeal application with costs.

04/04/2023

In a groundbreaking judgment that will have a devastating effect on the pockets of the Road Accident Fund CEO Collins Letsoalo and his board members, the Mpumalanga division of the high court ordered they were personally liable to pay the legal costs in two RAF matters in which the fund did not do its work.
The full article can be read here:

The high court ordered that they were personally liable to pay the legal costs in two RAF matters in which the fund simply did not do its work and while it is not clear how much, some legal experts estimate that it's hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

07/03/2023

Jacobs v Road Accident Fund and Another (99830/2015)[2023] ZAGPPHC 4 (9 January 2023) Summary
The Plaintiff in casu, was a 59 year old man who sued the first Defendant in terms of the Road Accident Fund Act for bodily injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision wherein he was standing on the side of the road and was struck by a truck. The Plaintiff worked as a self employed motor vehicle collision assessor and was unable to return to work as a result of the sequelae of the collision, as well as the negligence he suffered at the hands of nursing staff while receiving treatment at Klerksdorp and Tshepong Hospitals.
The Plaintiff was entitled to general damages claim under the narrative test and his claim against the second defendant, being the MEC for Health, North West, was settled to prior the hearing against the RAF at R 2,4 million. As against the first defendant the court found the Fund liable to pay R2 970 092,60 to the Plaintiff in settlement of his claim.
Full case available at: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2023/4.html

22/02/2023

Transmission of general damages to a deceased’s estate
General damages can be described as damages awarded to compensate a plaintiff for any harm suffered as a result of injuries sustained and which includes pain and suffering, disfigurement, emotional harm, permanent disabilities and loss of amenities of life.
In terms of the common law, a claim for general damages only transfers to a deceased estate if litis contestatio had been reached. Jankowiak v Parity Insurance Co Ltd. litis contestatio means when pleadings close.
Pleading are considered close in term of Rule 29 of the Uniform Rules of Court if, either party has joined issue without alleging any new matter, and without adding any further pleading, the last day allowed for filing a replication or subsequent pleading has elapsed and it has not been filed, the parties agree in writing that the pleadings are closed and such agreement is filed with the registrar, or the parties are unable to agree as to the close of pleadings, and the court upon the application of a party declares them closed.
However in recent matter, the court have attempted to develop common to allow for the transmission of general damages to the estate of the plaintiff. In Nkala and others v Harmony Gold Mining Company Limited developed the common law to allow for the transmissibility of claims for general damages to the deceased's estate even if pleadings have not reached the stage of litis contestatio. The argument is that while the need for the development for the common law is recognised, the minority opinion should be the preferred approach. The majority held that the common law should be developed to allow all claims for general damages to be transmissible to the deceased's estate even if the stage of litis contestatio has not been reached. The minority, per Windell J, agreed with the majority that the common law should be developed, but was of the opinion that the development should happen incrementally and be limited to the class action before it.
In the subsequent matter of Ngubane v Road Accident Fund [2022] ZAGPJHC 275, the court held that the development of the common law as per the majority in Nkala has not found universal acceptance in our law and divergent approaches remain. The measured and cautionary approach as per the minority in Nkala was preferable above the majority’s blanket approach. No proper binding development of the common law in relation to general transmissibility of general damages claims have taken place and the existing Supreme Court of Appeal authorities on transmissibility of general damages claims remain binding.
The legal position of the common law of transmission of a general damages claims to the estate of the deceased occurs only upon litis contestatio prevails. It is therefore paramount that pleadings get closed in terms of Rule 29 of Uniform Rules of Court to curtail the issue of non-transmission.

13/02/2023

The RAF CEO appeared in person in June 2022 before the court and through the advocate appearing for the RAF, faced questions by the judges regarding the functioning of the fund. One of the questions is what contingency plans were in place when it fired its panel of attorneys in 2020. The judges stated that the court had to step in to ensure claims were dealt with adequately and to try to prevent chaos. They also wanted answers as to why Letsoalo and his board should not personally face a costs order. The inquiry was sparked by two cases which were settled at the last minute, as the trials were supposed to begin. Things started to go wrong after the fund fired its panel of lawyers to deal with RAF matters. While the CEO blamed funds and a lack of manpower as part of the problems, Judge Legodi said it is the responsibility of the CEO and the board to ensure that the fund prepares properly for cases before the courts. In a strongly worded 97-page judgment, the judge made it clear if the fund did not get its house in order, chaos regarding RAF matters in courts around the country can be the result. The court made a “de bonis propris” cost order against them.

The full article can be read here :

The high court ordered that they were personally liable to pay the legal costs in two RAF matters in which the fund simply did not do its work and while it is not clear how much, some legal experts estimate that it's hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

01/02/2023

Anna obo PNH v Road Accident Fund (942/18) [2022] ZAMPMHC 27 (15 December 2022)

The plaintiff, sued the Road Accident Fund on behalf of her six-year-old daughter who was involved in a motor vehicle accident. The court found that the child’s career was severely compromised as a result of the injuries she sustained from the accident and that she will no longer attain the same career goals as she would have had the accident not happened. The Road Accident Fund was ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of R900 000.00 in respect of general damages and R6 664 708.00 in respect of loss of earnings.

The full judgment can be read here :

NDABA SIBONGILE ANNA                                                                    PLAINTIFF