LPL4802 ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2 FOR 2022-
LAW OF DAMAGES. DISTINCTION GUARANTEED.
90% AND ABOVE. QUALITY WORK WITH FOOTNOTES
AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.
QUESTION 1
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae
and the actio iniuriarum.
a) Explain fully, these differences, paying particular attention to its origins and
development within the South African Legal System. (10)
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae and the
actio iniuriarum as given below. The action for pain and suffering emphasises the
importance of the right to bodily integrity, while the actio legis Aquiliae emphasise the
importance of the right to property, but there is an overlap between the historic actions
insofar as most of the elements for liability are concerned, except for the element of
harm. Potgieter et al emhasised that in case of pain and suffering/non-patrimonial
(general damages), the harm would possibly be physical pain, disfigurement, psychiatric
lesions and loss of amenities of life. 1 Thus, the diminution of the victims bodily and
psychological integrity. Therefore, when the harm takes the form of patrimonial lose,
then the affected individual uses the Aquilian action. 2 If in case it is pain associated with
bodily injury, there is a separate action that will be used which seems similar to the
Aqulian but which is of the German origin. On the other hand, if the harm takes the form
of injury or personality interest (aninjuria) the claim is then made in terms of actio
injuriarum. Another difference is that the action for pain and suffering provides for
damages for non-patrimonial loss (injury to personality) on account of the unlawful and
culpable infringement of the physical-mental integrity as well as in terms of certain other
1
Potgieter et al, Law of Damages (Juta 2016).
2
Potgieter et al (ibid).
LAW OF DAMAGES. DISTINCTION GUARANTEED.
90% AND ABOVE. QUALITY WORK WITH FOOTNOTES
AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.
QUESTION 1
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae
and the actio iniuriarum.
a) Explain fully, these differences, paying particular attention to its origins and
development within the South African Legal System. (10)
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae and the
actio iniuriarum as given below. The action for pain and suffering emphasises the
importance of the right to bodily integrity, while the actio legis Aquiliae emphasise the
importance of the right to property, but there is an overlap between the historic actions
insofar as most of the elements for liability are concerned, except for the element of
harm. Potgieter et al emhasised that in case of pain and suffering/non-patrimonial
(general damages), the harm would possibly be physical pain, disfigurement, psychiatric
lesions and loss of amenities of life. 1 Thus, the diminution of the victims bodily and
psychological integrity. Therefore, when the harm takes the form of patrimonial lose,
then the affected individual uses the Aquilian action. 2 If in case it is pain associated with
bodily injury, there is a separate action that will be used which seems similar to the
Aqulian but which is of the German origin. On the other hand, if the harm takes the form
of injury or personality interest (aninjuria) the claim is then made in terms of actio
injuriarum. Another difference is that the action for pain and suffering provides for
damages for non-patrimonial loss (injury to personality) on account of the unlawful and
culpable infringement of the physical-mental integrity as well as in terms of certain other
1
Potgieter et al, Law of Damages (Juta 2016).
2
Potgieter et al (ibid).
