Martail Abie Arends v Road Accident Fund

The plaintiff, Martail Abie Arends, was a minor pedestrian injured in a motor vehicle accident on 31 May 2016. The Road Accident Fund (RAF) accepted 100% liability for the plaintiff’s proven damages. The plaintiff sustained injuries including a right leg injury with lacerations, head injuries, and other serious injuries. He claimed future medical expenses (by way of a statutory undertaking), general damages, and past and future loss of income. At the hearing, the issues of negligence and general damages were separated, leaving only the quantification of loss of income and related relief for determination. The court was faced with conflicting and incomplete medico-legal information, particularly regarding the plaintiff’s prior medical condition, use of crutches at the time of the accident, and inconsistent reporting of career aspirations to experts. These uncertainties affected the assessment of the plaintiff’s uninjured earning potential.

The RAF was ordered to pay the plaintiff R2 509 926 for future loss of income. The plaintiff was granted an undertaking in terms of section 17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act for future medical and related expenses. General damages were separated and postponed sine die. The plaintiff was awarded party-and-party costs, including counsel’s fees on Scale B.

This case illustrates the High Court’s cautious approach to actuarial and expert evidence in RAF matters, particularly where assumptions about career progression and earning potential are not supported by objective facts. It underscores the importance of consistent and accurate medico-legal histories and demonstrates how substantial contingencies may be applied to account for uncertainty in quantifying loss of earning capacity.