REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO: 25788/2018
(1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3) REVISED: NO
Date: 25 October 2023 E van der Schyff
In the matter between:
CHEPETE GORATA PLAINTIFF
and
THE ROAD ACCIDENT FUND DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
Van der Schyff J
[1] The only issue to be determined is the plaintiff’s claim for loss of future income or, more accurately, her claim for loss of earning potential. Merits and general damages were previously settled.
[2] The trial proceeded in the absence of the defendant. A notice of set down was served on the defendant by hand.
[3] The plaintiff qualified as a primary schoolteacher in Botswana. She moved to South Africa in 2010. She has not worked at all since relocating to South Africa. After residing in the country since 2010 and being maintained by her husband, the plaintiff decided to enter the labour market again in 2016. Coincidentally, the accident underpinning this trial occurred on the day the plaintiff returned from Botswana after her academic results were confirmed by the Department of Training and Development in Botswana. The plaintiff confirmed that she intended to have her academic qualification certified through SAQA to apply for a teaching position in South Africa.
[4] The plaintiff sustained a degloving left foot injury with metatarsal fractures in the accident on 3 August 2016. As a result, her mobility is limited. She cannot walk or stand for long periods and often has to have her leg elevated when seated.
[5] The evidence before this court does not indicate that the plaintiff cannot work. She retained a residual earning capacity, although she might not be able to stand in front of a classroom anymore. Her position is to be differentiated from a manual laborer solely dependent on her physical ability to earn an income. The plaintiff did not sustain a head injury, and no suitably qualified expert witness indicated any psychological fallouts that would prevent the plaintiff from functioning optimally in an administrative capacity, even if her leg must be elevated at times.
[6] I am of the view that the actuarial calculation can be utilised as a guide in quantifying the plaintiff’s claim for loss of earning capacity. The plaintiff’s claim for loss of earning capacity needs to be quantified having regard to the facts of the matter, amongst others, the plaintiff’s qualification, her unemployment since 2010, the fact that there is no evidence that her qualification would have been recognised in South Africa, and her undisputed residual earning capacity.
[7] The actuary calculated the plaintiff’s future earnings, if not for the accident, as R4 811 821, and after the accident, as R 1 278 256.00. I am of the view that a 40% contingency deduction on the ‘but for’ scenario and a 10% deduction for the ‘post-accident scenario sufficiently cater to all the uncertainties. The plaintiff’s claim for loss of earning capacity can thus be quantified as R 1 736 662.00.
ORDER
In the result, the following order is granted:
1. The draft order marked ‘X’ dated and signed by me is made an order of Court.
____________________________
E van der Schyff
Judge of the High Court
Delivered: This judgement is handed down electronically by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on CaseLines. It will be emailed to the parties/their legal representatives as a courtesy gesture.
For the plaintiff: Mr. B Mojapelo
Instructed by: Mphela & Associates
Date of the hearing: 20 October 2023
Date of judgment: 25 October 2023