The Road Accident Fund v Mbele

The deceased, Mr Simphiwe Robert Makutoana, was employed as a stevedore at the Cape Town Harbour. On 20 February 2010 he was fatally injured when he was struck by a Reach Stacker operated within the harbour premises. The respondent, Ms Thandiswa Linah Mbele, his common law wife, instituted a claim against the Road Accident Fund (RAF) on her own behalf and on behalf of their four minor children for loss of support in terms of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996. The RAF disputed liability, contending that a Reach Stacker is not a ‘motor vehicle’ as defined in s 1 of the Act. The trial court upheld the RAF’s contention and dismissed the claim. On appeal, a full bench of the Western Cape Division reversed that decision and held that the Reach Stacker qualified as a motor vehicle. The RAF appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel where employed. The finding that the Reach Stacker is a motor vehicle as defined in the RAF Act was upheld.

This judgment clarifies and reinforces the approach to determining whether specialised or industrial vehicles fall within the definition of ‘motor vehicle’ under the Road Accident Fund Act. It confirms that primary purpose is not decisive and that courts must consider objectively whether the vehicle was designed or adapted for safe use on a road as part of its ordinary functions. The decision broadens the scope of RAF liability in respect of accidents involving industrial vehicles operating on roads within controlled environments such as ports and harbours.