Archive | May 2011

Passenger Claims – The Mvumvu (CCT 67/10 ZACC 1) aftermath

Dear Reader,

Welcome to the twentieth edition of Independent Actuaries and Consultant’s (IAC’s) monthly newsletter.

WE PROVIDE LOSS OF INCOME AND LOSS OF SUPPORT CALCULATIONS TO ATTORNEYS DEALING WITH MVA & OTHER DAMAGES CLAIMS. WE ALSO PROVIDE FREE TRAINING SEMINARS ON THE RAF AMENDMENT ACT TO ALL OUR VALUED CLIENTS.

If you send us instructions you are entitled to the same.

Via this newsletter we will keep you updated of all the latest case law relating to motor vehicle
accidents, the quantification of damages relating to personal injury claims and dates and
venues of training seminars.

Passenger Claims – The Mvumvu aftermath

The facts of this matter are that Ms Mvumvu and 2 other sustained serious injuries in separate collisions, prior to 1 August 2008, whilst being conveyed as passengers. They launched an application to declare section 18 of the RAF Act (“the Act”), which places a R 25 000.00 limitation on their claims for damages, invalid. The Western Cape High Court (WCHC) declared parts of S 18 invalid as it found the limitation to be unconstitutional. However, it ordered that Ms Mvumvu and the other Applicants would qualify for no greater compensation than those who suffered bodily injury after the Amendment Act took effect.

The order was referred to the Constitutional Court (CC) for confirmation and Ms Mvumvu and the 2 others applied to the CC that the order made by the WCHC insofar as it limited their claims to that which they are entitled to recover under the Amendment Act, be set aside, as they were injured prior to the amendment act coming into effect.  The fund did not oppose the declaration of unconstitutionality of S 18 but opposed an order granting all passengers injured prior to 1 August 2008, whose claims had not finally been dealt with, being allowed to claim on an unlimited basis.  The fund cited financial reasons and the sustainability of the fund to motivate their argument not to allow the order of unconstitutionality to operate retrospectively.  The CC confirmed the order of invalidity of parts of S 18 of the Act and ruled that the matter must be remitted to Parliament for it to provide relief for the inequality which the old scheme continues to cause passengers injured prior to 1 August 2008, whose claims has not been finalized.   The invalidity order is therefore suspended for 18 months to give Parliament the opportunity to fix the problem.

If Parliament fails to cure the defect within the period stated above, which runs out on 16 August 2012, the invalidity order will come into operation with immediate effect and it will operate retrospectively to the date on which the Act came into force. What this means is that the applicants will be entitled to unlimited compensation as if the cap was never enacted. However, the declaration of invalidity ought not to apply to claims in respect of which a final settlement has been reached or a final judgment has been granted, before the date of this judgment (17 February 2011).   As a result of the CC judgement the fund has revoked their previous directive not to make any offers on claims i.t.o. S 18(1)(a)(i) (persons injured while being conveyed “for reward”), S 18(1)(b) (passengers who were conveyed under circumstances other than those referred to in section 18(1)(a)) and S 18(2) (persons who has a COIDA claim) and will once again make offers up to the maximum of R 25 000.00.
Sending us an Instruction:

Our dedicated full time professional team receive instructions by any of the following means:
• Email : damagesclaims@iac.co.za, or
• Post : PO Box 1172, Cape Town, 8000
• Fax : 086 616 8308

Now for some words of wisdom –
“The thing a wicked man fears shall come upon him, but the desire of the (uncompromisingly)
righteous shall be granted” – Proverbs 10:24 (AMP)

Advertisements