LPL4802
ASSIGNMENT 1
DUE DATE: 26 MARCH 2026
, LPL4802 Assignment 1 2026
DUE 26 March 2026
QUESTION 1
Critically discuss the judgment in Jordaan v Road Accident Fund (2022/03746) [2023]
ZAGPJHC 1260 (3 October 2023) with specific reference to the court’s approach to the
assessment and procedural handling of damages claims.
2. Material Facts and Nature of the Damages Claimed
The plaintiff, Mr Jordaan, instituted an action against the Road Accident Fund for damages
arising from bodily injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision. Liability was either
conceded or previously determined, leaving quantum as the primary issue for adjudication.
The damages claimed included patrimonial loss, such as loss of earnings and future medical
expenses, as well as non-patrimonial loss in the form of general damages for pain and
suffering.1
After pleadings had closed and litis contestatio had been reached, the plaintiff effected
substantial amendments to the quantum of his claim. These amendments significantly
increased the amounts claimed and were accompanied by an application for interim
payment of damages in terms of Rule 34A and section 17(6) of the RAF Act. The RAF
opposed the application, arguing that the procedural posture of the matter and the nature of
the amendments rendered interim relief inappropriate.
3. Litis Contestatio and the Effect of Substantial Amendments to Quantum
1 Jordaan v Road Accident Fund (2022/03746) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1260 (GJ).
ASSIGNMENT 1
DUE DATE: 26 MARCH 2026
, LPL4802 Assignment 1 2026
DUE 26 March 2026
QUESTION 1
Critically discuss the judgment in Jordaan v Road Accident Fund (2022/03746) [2023]
ZAGPJHC 1260 (3 October 2023) with specific reference to the court’s approach to the
assessment and procedural handling of damages claims.
2. Material Facts and Nature of the Damages Claimed
The plaintiff, Mr Jordaan, instituted an action against the Road Accident Fund for damages
arising from bodily injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision. Liability was either
conceded or previously determined, leaving quantum as the primary issue for adjudication.
The damages claimed included patrimonial loss, such as loss of earnings and future medical
expenses, as well as non-patrimonial loss in the form of general damages for pain and
suffering.1
After pleadings had closed and litis contestatio had been reached, the plaintiff effected
substantial amendments to the quantum of his claim. These amendments significantly
increased the amounts claimed and were accompanied by an application for interim
payment of damages in terms of Rule 34A and section 17(6) of the RAF Act. The RAF
opposed the application, arguing that the procedural posture of the matter and the nature of
the amendments rendered interim relief inappropriate.
3. Litis Contestatio and the Effect of Substantial Amendments to Quantum
1 Jordaan v Road Accident Fund (2022/03746) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1260 (GJ).
