Summers v General Accident Insurance Co South Africa Ltd

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Van Den Heever J
• Judgment Date: 02 May 1985
• Citation: 1985 (3) SA 418 (C)
• Hearing Date: 20 March 1985
• Court: Cape Provincial Division

Summers v General Accident Insurance Co South Africa Ltd
1985 (3) SA 418 (C)

1985 (3) SA p418

Citation	1985 (3) SA 418 (C)
Court	Cape Provincial Division
Judge	Van Den Heever J
Heard	March 20, 1985
Judgment	May 2, 1985

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde H

Negligence — Action for damages — For fatal injuries — Loss of support — Date upon which damages to be computed — Claim in respect of damages suffered by a minor — Approach that such damages should always be computed as at the I date of delict (or date of injury) not the only correct one — Computing such damages as at date of trial not necessarily wrong — Court computing minor's damages as at date of trial where period during which minor could expect to have been supported by deceased was comparatively short, the difference between the amounts arrived in the two calculations was substantial and it was equitable to adopt the date of trial J as the date upon which the damages were to be computed.

1985 (3) SA p419

Headnote : Kopnota

The approach to determining the date upon which a minor's A damages for loss of support is to be computed set out in Koch Damages for Lost Income at 111 - 112, namely: "... in matters concerning loss of earning capacity or expectations of support, the proper approach is to discount at interest all losses, past and future, to present value as at the date of injury but subject to the proviso that when discounting for risk it is appropriate, when assessing the relevant chances, to take account of events supervening between date of injury and date of trial", is not the only correct approach. The approach B adopted in Wigham v British Traders Insurance Co Ltd1963 (3) SA 151 (W), namely a two-stage assessment of accrued loss to trial and capitalized discounted future loss from the date of trial, is not necessarily wrong.

Sigournay v Gillbanks1960 (2) SA 552 (A) distinguished and not followed.

The Court, in an action for damages for loss of support by a minor arising out of the death of the minor's father in a C collision, computed the minor's damages as at the date of trial, taking into account that the period during which the minor could expect to have been maintained by the deceased was comparatively short and the difference (R2000 in favour of the minor, if computed as at the date of trial) between the two methods of calculation was substantial. The Court held that the circumstances were sufficiently similar to those in the Wigham D case supra to induce the Court to adopt the approach in that case.

Case Information

Action for damages for loss of support. Facts not material to this report have been omitted from the reasons for judgment.

J R Whitehead for the plaintiff.

A P Blignault for the defendant. E

Cur adv vult.

Postea (May 2).

Judgment

Van den Heever J:

Plaintiff sues defendant for damages suffered through loss of support by her illegitimate child when its father, Paul Martin, riding a motorcycle, was killed in a collision with a car driven by Mr Raynor Felix and insured by defendant in terms of the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance G Act 56 of 1972.

The collision occurred on the night of Sunday, 5 September 1982, in Weltevreden Road in Mitchell's Plain.

A number of issues were agreed upon before the trial. The main matters remaining for decision by the Court are:

1.

Whether Mr Felix was causally negligent in relation to the collision.

2.

Whether the child's damages should be...