Saayman v Road Accident Fund

The appellant, A T Saayman, an exceptionally talented market risk professional employed by Standard Bank, was seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision on 13 June 2005. He sustained diffuse axonal brain injury resulting in lasting cognitive and personality changes. Before the accident, he was earmarked for rapid advancement and was expected, on the evidence, to be promoted to Head of Market Risk by 1 January 2014. After the accident, although he returned to work and remained employed in a similar role, expert evidence established that he would never progress beyond his current position and faced increased vulnerability in a highly competitive banking environment. The Road Accident Fund conceded liability and settled all heads of damages except future loss of income or earning capacity. The High Court awarded R4 295 290 for future loss of earnings, which the appellant contended was materially underestimated due to misdirections in contingencies, actuarial assumptions, and salary calculations.

The appeal succeeded with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The High Court’s award of R4 295 290 for future loss of income was set aside and replaced with an award of R13 572 649. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the actuary, Mr Ivan Kramer.

This case is significant for its detailed guidance on the assessment of future loss of earnings in Road Accident Fund claims, particularly in relation to contingency deductions, promotion prospects, and actuarial assumptions. It clarifies the distinction between concessions by counsel and binding admissions, and confirms the appellate court’s power to interfere with quantum where material misdirections result in a strikingly inappropriate award. The judgment is frequently cited in matters involving professional career trajectories and loss of earning capacity.