---

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,

GAUTENG DIVISION,

JOHANNESBURG

CASE NO: 39869/10

DATE: 04 FEBRUARY 2014

In the matter between:

Sithi: Ndanganeni Caroline................................Plaintiff

And

Road Accident Fund........................................Defendant

JUDGMENT – PART 3 – 4 FEBRUARY 2014

WRIGHT J

1. After a lengthy wait since part 2 of my judgment, given on 25 September 2013 the parties have presented a joint minute signed by their actuaries and dated 29 January 2014. By agreement this minute was admitted in evidence. Both counsel saw me in chambers and addressed me after having closed their clients’ cases. In the minute, Mr Jacobson, the actuary for Ms Sithi suggests two bases for calculating Ms Sithi’s future loss of earnings. In my view there is no basis for me accept his second basis which results in a higher figure. Mr Louw, for Ms Sithi was unable to suggest any sound reason for my accepting Mr Jacobson’s second basis. It does not accord with my earlier judgments. The difference between Mr Jacobson’s first basis and the figure suggested by Mr Du Plessis for the Fund is tiny. Given that Ms Sithi has the onus I cannot on paper and without the benefit of tested evidence prefer Mr Jacobson’s first basis over Mr Du Plessis’s suggestion. I find that Ms Sithi has proved future loss of earnings in the sum of R1 623 585, being Mr Du Plessis’ figure. The parties have provided me with a draft order and I am required simply to fill in the figure for future loss of earnings.

ORDER

The draft order marked ‘X’ and signed by me is made an order of court.

On behalf of the Plaintiff: Adv. Louw 082 452 8482

Instructed by: McMillan Attorneys

011 333 0100

On behalf of the Respondent: Adv. Strydom 083 326 4425

Instructed by: Kunene Ramapala Botha Attorneys C/O

Goba Attorneys 011 463 3888

Hearing finalised: 4 February 2014

Date of Judgment: 4 February 2014

---