Klein v Road Accident Fund

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Jansen J
• Judgment Date: 10 December 2008
• Citation: 2008 JDR 1568 (SE)
• Docket Number: 3050/06
• Court: South Eastern Cape Local Division

Jansen J:

The plaintiff instituted action against the defendant for damages which he suffered as a result of a motor vehicle accident. The accident occurred on 3 June 2004. He at the time travelled on his Honda motor cycle. On the double carriage way between Uitenhage and Port Elizabeth a combi taxi executed a U-turn directly in front of the plaintiff and this resulted in the plaintiff crashing into the taxi. This happened at approximately 17h45 on the day in question.

The matter originally came before Liebenberg J. He made an order directing the separation of the merits of the case and the quantum of damages. Having listened to evidence, the learned Judge came to the conclusion that the driver of the taxi was solely to blame for the collision. He granted an order declaring the defendant to be liable to pay to the plaintiff all such damages arising from the collision as the plaintiff may be able to prove. The matter came before me on the quantum of damages.

2008 JDR 1568 p2

Jansen J

The parties agreed on the amount of R524 349,03 as damages for past hospital expenses. As far as future medical and hospital expenses are concerned, the defendant offered an undertaking to the plaintiff in terms of section 17(4) of the Road Accident Fund Act. What was in issue before me was the plaintiff's claim for damages for loss of income as well as general damages. Several witnesses, including the plaintiff, testified before me. Eventually the defendant admitted several medical reports as well as the hospital records of the plaintiff. No evidence was adduced on behalf of the defendant.

The plaintiff was born on 19 May 1959. He was 45 years old at the time of the collision. The plaintiff grew up in Port Elizabeth and obtained his matric at the Commercial High School in the city. In 1978 he took up employment with the South African Railways and Harbours. During 1979-1980 he was doing military service at the South African Defence Force. He obtained the rank of lance corporal. Having completed his military service he in 1981 again got employed by the South African Railways. He worked for Portnet in the staff and labour office. He was involved in the planning of loads for container ships and cartage. He 1989 he was promoted to the position of a senior clerk and 1994 promoted to the position of a chief clerk. In 2002 the plaintiff moved from Portnet to a subsidiary thereof, called Freight Dynamics. His title changed to chief administrator although he was still referring to himself as a "chief clerk". At the time of the accident the plaintiff was the chief administrator planning container loads for inter alia Good Year and

2008 JDR 1568 p3

Jansen J

Volkswagen. He was also involved with the road travel side of the business. He supervised a couple of junior clerks and had several drivers under his control. The plaintiff's immediate supervisor was a certain Mr Harry Haroldt. At the time of the collision the plaintiff was in the second highest notch of his position as a chief administrator. The salary he earned at the time was not in dispute. The retirement age of an employee at Freight Dynamics is 63 years. It was accepted that the plaintiff would have continued to work at Freight Dynamics until retirement age. It is common cause that the accident rendered the plaintiff completely incapable of continuing to do his work. He was boarded as medically unfit and is at present receiving a disability income.

Although Mr Haroldt, who testified for the plaintiff, expressed the view that the plaintiff would have succeeded him as the operational manager, it is clear that the plaintiff, although a very good worker, did not have the same qualifications as Mr Haroldt had at the time. Mr Haroldt has completed several in-house courses in connection with his work. In Mr Haroldt's absence the plaintiff sometimes acted in his position. That was also the case with two other employees holding the same rank as the plaintiff. The plaintiff also had to do some overtime work. It was accepted that the plaintiff would have reached the top notch on the salary scale attached to the position of chief clerk during 2006. It is common cause that the business of Freight Dynamics was reduced to a certain extent. That was blamed on a policy to allow different transport contractors into the harbour area. Mr Haroldt decided that it would be better for his future to leave the services of Freight Dynamics and he obtained a position similar to the one he had at a different transport company.

2008 JDR 1568 p4

Jansen J

The two chief clerks working with the plaintiff in the meantime resigned from Freight Dynamics. Another person had to be trained to do their work but he has in the meantime also resigned. It is common cause that Mr Haroldt's vacant position was never advertised and not filled. I am of the view that the plaintiff has not proved that he would probably have been appointed in the position of operations manager, the position held by Mr Haroldt. His future loss of income has therefore to be determined on the notch which he would have reached in 2006.

The plaintiff was and apparently is still a motor bike fanatic. He attended...