lOMoAR cPSD| 27753314
LPL4802 Assignment 01 Answers
Law of damages(university of south
africa
, lOMoAR cPSD| 27753314
LPL4802 ASSIGNMENT 01
Student number:
Name:
a) The three pillars of the South African law of delict are the actio legis Aquiliae, the
actio iniuriarum, and the action for Pain and Suffering. However, these pillars are
distinguishable from each other either by their origin, fields of application or overall
development.1 This essay will investigate the origins and development of these actions
and further discuss the different claims (heads of damage) that are actionable under
Pain and Suffering.
Actio legis Aquiliae, the actio iniuriarum played an important role in Roman law whilst
Pain and Suffering developed in Roman-Dutch law. The actio legis Aquiliae sometimes
referred to as the lex Aquiilia under the Act (plebiscitum) from 287 BC is a generic
delictual action used to assert claims for patrimonial or monetary damage. It can be
used to request compensation when the defendant destroyed or damaged the relevant
property wrongfully (and in a culpable way). Lex Aquilia was initially only applicable to
specific forms of damage to things (corporeal assets). It was limited to the killing or
injury of a slave or four-legged animal as well as the burning, breaking, and destruction
of other objects. Moreover, only the injured property owner could pursue the Aquilian
action.2
The Aquilian action's scope of applicability has grown significantly over time as a result
of in-depth legal interpretation and the granting of actiones utiles and in factum.
Therefore, Aquilian liability could arise following any kind of physical infringement of a
thing, rather than just, as was the case initially, following infringements of a certain,
defined nature. Another significant change was that the wrongdoer was now required
to make up for all patrimonial damage that came from his wrongful act in addition to
the damage that was done to the thing itself (id quod interest). Moreover, a major
development occurred during the Justinian's time where in addition to the owner, other
1 J Neethling and JM Potgieter, Law of Delict (7th edn, LexisNexis 2015) 23.
2 Neethling and Potgieter, 23.
LPL4802 Assignment 01 Answers
Law of damages(university of south
africa
, lOMoAR cPSD| 27753314
LPL4802 ASSIGNMENT 01
Student number:
Name:
a) The three pillars of the South African law of delict are the actio legis Aquiliae, the
actio iniuriarum, and the action for Pain and Suffering. However, these pillars are
distinguishable from each other either by their origin, fields of application or overall
development.1 This essay will investigate the origins and development of these actions
and further discuss the different claims (heads of damage) that are actionable under
Pain and Suffering.
Actio legis Aquiliae, the actio iniuriarum played an important role in Roman law whilst
Pain and Suffering developed in Roman-Dutch law. The actio legis Aquiliae sometimes
referred to as the lex Aquiilia under the Act (plebiscitum) from 287 BC is a generic
delictual action used to assert claims for patrimonial or monetary damage. It can be
used to request compensation when the defendant destroyed or damaged the relevant
property wrongfully (and in a culpable way). Lex Aquilia was initially only applicable to
specific forms of damage to things (corporeal assets). It was limited to the killing or
injury of a slave or four-legged animal as well as the burning, breaking, and destruction
of other objects. Moreover, only the injured property owner could pursue the Aquilian
action.2
The Aquilian action's scope of applicability has grown significantly over time as a result
of in-depth legal interpretation and the granting of actiones utiles and in factum.
Therefore, Aquilian liability could arise following any kind of physical infringement of a
thing, rather than just, as was the case initially, following infringements of a certain,
defined nature. Another significant change was that the wrongdoer was now required
to make up for all patrimonial damage that came from his wrongful act in addition to
the damage that was done to the thing itself (id quod interest). Moreover, a major
development occurred during the Justinian's time where in addition to the owner, other
1 J Neethling and JM Potgieter, Law of Delict (7th edn, LexisNexis 2015) 23.
2 Neethling and Potgieter, 23.
