Fourie v Ronald Bobroff & Partners Inc

The appellant, Ms Ursha Yvonne Fourie, instructed the respondent firm of attorneys, Ronald Bobroff & Partners Inc, to pursue claims against the Road Accident Fund (RAF) arising from a fatal motor vehicle collision on 27 June 2005 in which her husband and young daughter died, and she and her son were injured. The respondent settled the RAF action in July 2011 for approximately R1.78 million, including amounts for loss of support and general damages, but did not pursue a claim for loss of earning capacity on the basis that it was less advantageous. Dissatisfied, the appellant sued the respondent for breach of mandate, alleging failure to pursue a substantial loss of earning capacity claim and acceptance of inadequate general damages. The High Court dismissed her claim, and she appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, save that the High Court’s order was varied to substitute the dismissal of the claim with an order of absolution from the instance.

The case clarifies the professional standard expected of attorneys specialising in personal injury claims, particularly the duty to properly investigate and quantify claims for loss of earning capacity using expert evidence. It also reaffirms that even where breach of mandate is proven, a claimant must still prove actual damages to succeed, and highlights the appropriateness of absolution from the instance where damages are not established.