Phillipus Arnold Venter Du Plessis v Road Accident Fund

On 27 September 2014 at about 19h00, a collision occurred at the intersection of Buffelsfontein and Glendore Roads in Port Elizabeth between a Suzuki motorcycle ridden by the appellant and a motor vehicle driven by the insured driver. The appellant suffered serious injuries. The parties agreed on the quantum of damages at R1 778 550, leaving only the issue of liability. The appellant alleged that after stopping at the stop sign and turning right into Buffelsfontein Road, he travelled about 45–50 metres, pulled off onto the gravel verge to access his housing complex, and while stationary was struck from behind by the insured vehicle. The insured driver alleged that the appellant failed to stop at the stop sign and entered the intersection directly into his path, causing the collision on the tarred surface. The trial court and full court accepted the insured driver’s version and dismissed the claim. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The orders of the full court and trial court were set aside. The appellant’s claim succeeded and the Road Accident Fund was ordered to pay R1 778 550 with interest, furnish an undertaking in terms of s 17(4)(a) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996, and pay the appellant’s taxed party-and-party costs.

The case reaffirms the proper approach to resolving factual disputes involving mutually destructive versions, emphasising the mandatory application of the Stellenbosch Farmers’ Winery test. It underscores the importance of credibility findings, internal and external contradictions, and objective evidence in RAF collision cases, and illustrates when an appellate court may interfere with factual findings of lower courts.