Jongisile Fonjwa v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accident Fund and Another

The appellant, a permanent member of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), was injured on 1 September 1996 when the vehicle in which he was a passenger overturned. He claimed damages from the Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accident Fund, alternatively the Road Accident Fund. The respondent conceded liability in principle but contended that compensation was limited to R25 000 under article 46 of the Schedule to the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund Act 93 of 1989, which limited passengers’ claims. The appellant argued that he fell within the statutory exception because, as a permanent SANDF member, he was ‘rendering military service’ at the time of the accident. The court a quo held that he was not rendering military service because he was not on active or combat duty, and thus applied the limitation. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the court a quo was set aside and replaced with an order declaring that the appellant was exempt from the passenger limitation in article 46 of the Schedule to Act 93 of 1989, and ordering the Road Accident Fund to pay the appellant’s costs.

This decision authoritatively clarified the meaning of ‘rendering military service’ in passenger limitation provisions under South African motor vehicle accident compensation legislation. It resolved conflicting High Court authority and confirmed that permanent SANDF members are exempt from passenger limitations regardless of whether they are on active duty or engaged in military operations at the time of the accident. The case is significant for statutory interpretation, legislative history analysis, and the policy objective of protecting motorists who transport soldiers.