Road Accident Fund v Makwetlane

The respondent, Bennet Lefu Makwetlane, was injured on 6 May 1999 in Johannesburg when he was allegedly struck by a motor vehicle while a pedestrian. The identity of the driver and owner of the vehicle was not established, making it an unidentified ("hit and run") claim under section 17(1)(b) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996. Makwetlane sued the Road Accident Fund (RAF) in the Johannesburg Magistrates’ Court for compensation. The RAF raised a special plea that Makwetlane had failed to comply with regulation 2(1)(c), which requires a claimant, if reasonably possible, to submit an affidavit to the police within 14 days after being in a position to do so. The Magistrates’ Court upheld the special plea and dismissed the claim. On appeal, the Witwatersrand Local Division held that regulation 2(1)(c) was ultra vires the Act and dismissed the RAF’s special plea. The RAF then appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The final order of the Supreme Court of Appeal is not expressly set out in the provided judgment text. It is therefore not possible, on the text alone, to state conclusively whether the appeal was upheld or dismissed, or what precise order was made.

The case is significant for its detailed engagement with the limits of delegated legislative power under section 26 of the Road Accident Fund Act and the application of the constitutional doctrine of legality to ministerial regulations. It highlights the tension between fraud-prevention measures in unidentified vehicle claims and access to compensation for vulnerable claimants. The judgments illustrate competing approaches within the SCA to the balance between statutory purpose, rational regulation, and the social realities of South Africa.