Slabbert v Member of the Executive Council for Health and Social Development, Gauteng Provincial Government

Ms Elmarie Slabbert sued the Gauteng MEC for Health and Social Development for damages arising from severe neurological injuries suffered by her minor son allegedly caused by negligent medical treatment during birth in May 2003. After pleadings closed, the parties separated merits and quantum. In April 2015, following internal advice, the MEC offered to compromise liability by accepting 90% liability for Slabbert’s proven damages. The offer was accepted and, on 4 May 2015, the compromise and separation were made orders of court. Subsequently, during preparation for the quantum trial, the MEC obtained an expert report (Prof Smuts) which allegedly contradicted causation. On the day quantum trial was to commence, the MEC applied for rescission of the consent order and underlying compromise, alleging new evidence and non-disclosure by Slabbert. The High Court granted rescission. Slabbert appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The order of the High Court was set aside and substituted with an order dismissing the application for rescission of the consent order dated 4 May 2015.

The case reaffirms the strong finality accorded to compromise agreements and consent orders in South African law. It clarifies that courts have no discretion to rescind consent orders unless the underlying compromise is set aside on recognised legal grounds. The judgment underscores that unilateral mistakes, even if material, do not justify resiling from settlements, thereby promoting certainty, finality, and the effective administration of justice.