LPL4802 DAMAGES ASSIGNMENT 1
YEAR 2022 SEMESTER 2
FOR MORE;
CONTACT +27611279778
EMAIL;
, QUESTION 1
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae
and the actio iniuriarum.
Explain fully, these differences, paying particular attention to its origins and
development within the South African Legal System.
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae and the
actio iniuriarum in a number of respects. As a summary, these actions differ in terms of
where they originated from and the heads of damages applicable to the remedies. These
actions are also distinguishable in terms of the individuals that can evoke the action.
In terms of origins, the action for pain and suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis
Aquiliae and the actio iniuriarum in a discrete manner.1 Action of pain and suffering
originates in Roman-Dutch law whereas actio legis Aquiliae and the actio iniuriarum can
be traced back to Roman Law.2 This means that this action was not available to a Roman
law litigant.3 The action for pain and suffering was available to persons who suffered
negligent bodily injuries.4 Its scope of application under the Roman-Dutch law did not
cover all forms of pain and suffering because it was restricted to “pain, suffering and bodily
disfigurement”.5
The action for pain and suffering is currently recognised as a separate delictual action
and has continued to be developed under the influence of the English Law in
contemporary South African law.6 A review of case law shows that various claims can
now be actioned under this action. These actions now include loss of amenities of life,
loss of future earnings, mental pain and anguish among other heads of damages.7 The
1
Neethling and Potgieter Neethling-Potgieter-Visser Law of Delict 16.
.
YEAR 2022 SEMESTER 2
FOR MORE;
CONTACT +27611279778
EMAIL;
, QUESTION 1
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae
and the actio iniuriarum.
Explain fully, these differences, paying particular attention to its origins and
development within the South African Legal System.
The action for Pain and Suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis Aquiliae and the
actio iniuriarum in a number of respects. As a summary, these actions differ in terms of
where they originated from and the heads of damages applicable to the remedies. These
actions are also distinguishable in terms of the individuals that can evoke the action.
In terms of origins, the action for pain and suffering is distinguishable from the actio legis
Aquiliae and the actio iniuriarum in a discrete manner.1 Action of pain and suffering
originates in Roman-Dutch law whereas actio legis Aquiliae and the actio iniuriarum can
be traced back to Roman Law.2 This means that this action was not available to a Roman
law litigant.3 The action for pain and suffering was available to persons who suffered
negligent bodily injuries.4 Its scope of application under the Roman-Dutch law did not
cover all forms of pain and suffering because it was restricted to “pain, suffering and bodily
disfigurement”.5
The action for pain and suffering is currently recognised as a separate delictual action
and has continued to be developed under the influence of the English Law in
contemporary South African law.6 A review of case law shows that various claims can
now be actioned under this action. These actions now include loss of amenities of life,
loss of future earnings, mental pain and anguish among other heads of damages.7 The
1
Neethling and Potgieter Neethling-Potgieter-Visser Law of Delict 16.
.
