Road Accident Fund v Mphirime

The respondent was injured as a passenger in a motor vehicle collision on 12 June 2012, rendering the Road Accident Fund (RAF) liable for 100% of her proven damages. Most aspects of her claim were settled, but a dispute arose regarding compensation for the future cost of employing a domestic assistant necessitated by her injuries. Although the RAF conceded the need for a domestic assistant and agreed on a reasonable amount, it sought to discharge its liability by furnishing an undertaking under s 17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996 rather than paying a lump sum. The High Court held that, following amendments to the Act, such costs could no longer be covered by an undertaking and ordered lump-sum payment. The RAF appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld. The High Court’s order directing lump-sum payment was set aside and replaced with an order declaring that the cost of employing a domestic assistant may be paid by way of an undertaking under s 17(4)(a), and directing the RAF to furnish such an undertaking. No order as to costs was made.

The case clarifies that, pending the prescription of a valid tariff under s 17(4B), the RAF remains entitled to compensate future non-medical service costs, including domestic assistance, by way of undertakings under s 17(4)(a). It resolves conflicting High Court decisions and confirms the continued relevance of pre-2008 jurisprudence on RAF undertakings.