Road Accident Fund v Mdeyide; Minister for Transport v Mdeyide

Mr Vusumzi Mdeyide, an indigent, illiterate and almost blind man, was struck by a motor vehicle on 8 March 1999 and suffered bodily injuries. He was unaware of his right to claim compensation from the Road Accident Fund (RAF) until September 1999. His attorney only lodged documentation with the RAF on 11 March 2002, three years and three days after the accident. The RAF rejected the claim as prescribed under section 23(1) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996, which requires claims to be instituted within three years from the date the cause of action arose, regardless of the claimant’s knowledge of the Fund. Mr Mdeyide challenged the constitutionality of this provision, arguing that it unjustifiably limited his right of access to courts.

The Constitutional Court refused to confirm the High Court’s order of constitutional invalidity. The appeal by the Road Accident Fund and the Minister for Transport was upheld, and section 23(1) of the Road Accident Fund Act was declared constitutional. Mr Mdeyide’s claim remained prescribed.

This case is a leading authority on the constitutionality of statutory prescription periods and their relationship to the right of access to courts. It affirms Parliament’s discretion to design rigid prescription regimes in social welfare legislation, even where such regimes may operate harshly, provided they serve legitimate purposes such as legal certainty and fiscal sustainability.