The Road Accident Fund v Rhesia Scholtz

The respondent was injured in a motor vehicle collision on 3 June 1994 while she was still a minor, having been born on 24 March 1976. The identity of the driver was known. Her claim for compensation was governed by the Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund Act 93 of 1989. She lodged her claim with the Fund on 29 February 2000 and summons was served on 20 July 2000. The Fund raised a special plea of prescription, contending that the claim had prescribed because summons was served more than five years after the date of the collision. The High Court dismissed the special plea, and the Fund appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, confirming that the respondent’s claim had not prescribed.

This case authoritatively clarified the interpretation of prescription provisions under the Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund Act, confirming that both the three-year and five-year prescription periods are suspended during a claimant’s minority. It rejected a contrary High Court view and provided important guidance on statutory interpretation in the context of Road Accident Fund claims involving minors.