Road Accident Fund v G S O Guedes

The respondent, a magazine editor born in 1978, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on 12 November 2000. She sustained whiplash injuries to her cervical spine, a thoracic sprain and a mild T7 vertebral compression fracture. Prior to the accident she was healthy, had progressed rapidly in her career, and was expected to be promoted further in the publishing industry. After the accident she suffered chronic pain, headaches and reduced work capacity, limiting her ability to work full-time and diminishing her prospects of promotion. The Road Accident Fund conceded liability, and the only issue was the quantum of damages for future loss of earning capacity. The High Court awarded R3 119 048 based on actuarial calculations with contingency deductions of 10% (but-for scenario) and 30% (post-accident scenario).

The appeal was partially upheld. The contingency deduction in the 'but for' scenario was increased from 10% to 20%. The award for future loss of income was reduced to R2 323 633. The appellant was ordered to pay the costs of appeal, including the costs of two counsel.

This case is a leading authority on appellate interference in awards for future loss of earnings and the application of contingency deductions in RAF claims. It clarifies the use of actuarial evidence, the relevance of age-based contingency guidelines, and confirms the limited circumstances in which appellate courts may interfere with a trial court’s discretion on quantum.