Image
Icon

Directory

IconAccounting & Tax
IconAccreditation Bodies
IconActuaries
IconAssociations and Institutes
IconAuditors
IconBBBEE Consulting and Verification Agencies
IconBusiness Process Management
IconBusiness Process Outsourcing
IconCompany Secretarial Services
IconCompare Medical Scheme Benefits
IconCompliance
IconConsumer Protection
IconCorporate Governance
IconCredit Bureaus
IconDebit Order Collection Facilities
IconEducation and Training
IconEmergency Medical Rescue
IconExpatriate Cover
IconFAIS
IconHealthcare Consultants
IconHuman Resources
IconInformation Technology and Software Partners
IconLegal
IconManaged Healthcare Service Providers
IconMedical Aid Administrators
IconMedical Aid Schemes
IconMedical Schemes Trustees Liability Insurance
IconMedical Service Providers
IconOmbud
IconPolicy Administration
IconPublications
IconRegulatory Authorities
IconSurveys & Research
IconTraining Courses & Workshops
IconWellness Programs
Image
  Subscribe To »

The once-and-for-all rule for delictual damages

Published

2017

Tue

11

Apr

 

 

 

 

Patrick Bracher, Director
Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa Inc.

 

 

 

A person who claims for damages sustained as a result of injuries negligently caused by someone else has a single, indivisible cause of action and must sue for all damages in one claim.

This proposition was reasserted in the context of a prescription allegation regarding a Road Accident Fund Act claim.

The RAF Act only allows an injured person to claim general damages if it is certified to be a serious injury by a medical practitioner.

The claimant in Manukha v Road Accident Fund pursued a claim for medical expenses and other actual losses but only delivered the form certifying her injuries as serious in order to claim non-pecuniary damages more than three years after the event.

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an allegation that the general damages claim had been extinguished by prescription. The claim for damages had been lodged in time even if the general damages had only been pursued later.

The once-and-for-all rule prevents paying future loss of earnings and medical expenses by future payments when the losses accrue, and needs to be looked at by the legislature in that context.

 
Source: Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa Inc.
 
« Back to previous page Print this page » |
 

Breaking News »

Support Services for Internal Compliance Officers

The main business of Moonstone Compliance is to provide an outsourced compliance service to FSPs in terms of Sec 17 of the FAIS Act. In addition, we render support to internal COs from a variety of registered entities, ...
Read More »

  

FSB Appeal Board and powers of the Registrar to debar

The decision in the Hlumbane case by the Appeal Board of the FSB provides very interesting information about the Board’s powers in terms of decisions made by the Registrar of Financial Services Providers, ...
Read More »

  

Be part of the change you want to see by attending your medical scheme’s AGM

The medical scheme industry has many challenges. In order for schemes to survive in the current medical climate, all members have to be constructively involved and understand both the products they have bought ...
Read More »

  

Getting global fees right

There is some controversy about alternative reimbursement models in the commercial healthcare industry. Global fees contracts - where a single payment is made to a healthcare team to cover all costs including hospitals, ...
Read More »

 

More News »

Image

Investment »

Image

Life »

Image

Retirement »

Image

Short-term »

Advertise Here
Image
Image
Image
Image
Advertise Here

From The Glossary »

Icon

Apportionment:

Where more than one insurance contract covers a loss, the determination of the extent to which each insurer is liable to meet the loss.
More Definitions »

 
 
By using this website you agree to the Terms of Use.
Copyright © Stoker Risk & ICT (Pty) Ltd 2004 - 2017.
All Rights Reserved.
Icon

Advertise

  Icon

eZine

  Icon

Contact IG

Icon

Media Pack

  Icon

RSS Feeds