Mr Lartz Gouws (first respondent) was allegedly struck by a motor vehicle on 24 July 2010, causing injuries. He lodged a claim for compensation with the Road Accident Fund (RAF) under section 17 of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996. Dr de Graad assessed his injuries as serious under the narrative test (Regulation 3(1)(b)(iii)(aa)) due to serious long-term impairment affecting both upper limbs. The RAF rejected his claim on 18 October 2012 on fallacious grounds, incorrectly stating that Dr de Graad had found the injury was not serious. Mr Gouws appealed to the Road Accident Appeal Tribunal (first appellant). The Tribunal, comprising members appointed by the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA), determined on 1 August 2014 that it could not find a link between the collision and the injuries to his left shoulder and right thumb, concluding the injuries were not serious under the narrative test. Mr Gouws applied to the Gauteng High Court for review of the Tribunal's decision, arguing the Tribunal exceeded its statutory powers by determining causation.