The Road Accident Fund v Elizabeth Jemma Sweatman

The respondent, Elizabeth Jemma Sweatman, was seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision in Cape Town in July 2010 when she was 15 years old. Her mother instituted action against the Road Accident Fund (RAF) for damages on her behalf, including future loss of income. Liability was agreed at 50%, and most aspects of the claim were settled. The only dispute concerned the correct interpretation and application of the statutory cap on claims for loss of income or support introduced by the 2008 amendments to the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996, specifically how the ‘annual loss’ limitation in section 17(4)(c), read with section 17(4A), should be applied in actuarial calculations.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The award in favour of the respondent as calculated by the trial court was upheld.

This case provides authoritative clarification from the Supreme Court of Appeal on how the statutory cap on loss of income or support under the amended Road Accident Fund Act must be applied. It resolved conflicting High Court decisions and confirmed that the cap does not alter the established methodology for calculating actual loss, but merely limits the amount payable. The decision promotes certainty, predictability, and consistency in RAF claims.