LPL4802 October November Portfolio (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2025 - DUE 30 October 2025

.QUESTION 1: NATURE AND ASSESSMENT OF NON-PATRIMONIAL LOSS (INJURY TO PERSONALITY) Study the attached judgment, MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government v AAS obo CMMS (401/2023) [2025] ZASCA 91 (20 June 2025), and answer the questions that follow. Your response must be written in essay format. Each substantive point you make, when supported by relevant legal authority, will carry a value of two (2) marks. 1.1 According to the majority judgment, how should the court a quo have approached comparable cases when assessing general damages? Discuss with reference to the relevant authority cited in the judgment. (15 marks) 1.2How should general damages be assessed in cases involving unconsciousness? Support your answer with the relevant authority as cited in the prescribed textbook. (10 marks) [25 marks] LPL 4802_OCT/NOV EXAM Page 5 of 9 QUESTION 2: QUANTUM OF DAMAGES AND SATISFACTION FOR NON-PATRIMONIAL LOSS (INJURY TO PERSONALITY) Study the majority judgment in the case mentioned in question 1 for question 2.1 2.1 Should claims for pain and suffering and for loss of amenities of life always be combined in their quantification? In your answer, first explain the distinction between these two heads of damages and then discuss the importance of handling them as separate heads. (12 marks) 2.2 Study the facts below and answer the question that follows: Factual Scenario On 12 March 2023, along the R81 road near Louis Trichardt, a motor vehicle collision occurred between a minibus taxi and a delivery truck. The plaintiff, Mr. Thabiso Mokoena, a 34-year-old schoolteacher from Polokwane, was a passenger in the taxi. He sustained multiple fractures to his leg and arm, as well as internal injuries requiring extended hospitalisation. The Road Accident Fund (RAF), acting on behalf of the defendant, accepted liability for the accident. After negotiations, Mr. Mokoena’s legal representatives secured an award of special damages amounting to R3.8 million, covering past and future medical expenses, loss of earnings, and related financial losses. Subsequent to the award, Mr. Mokoena’s lawyers have now lodged a claim for general damages, contending that he has suffered severe pain, loss of amenities of life, and emotional distress. The claim for general damages amounts to R2.5 million. The defendant, represented by counsel, disputes the quantum sought, contending that special and general damages are not entirely separate silos, but must be considered together in a holistic assessment. Assume the role of counsel for the defendant. Prepare structured heads of argument, supported by appropriate legal authority, to persuade the court that general damages ought not to be assessed in isolation in this context. (13 marks) LPL 4802_OCT/NOV EXAM Page 6 of 9 Aspect Mark Allocation Citation of Court and parties 4 (cite the appropriate division and parties fully) Introduction 2 (identify issues) Law and principle 4 (Provide a clear argument – referring to the facts to support your view) Conclusion 2 (include prayers) Language 1 (Use clear legal language, with full sentences) Total (13 marks) [25 marks] LPL 4802_OCT/NOV EXAM Page 7 of 9 QUESTION 3 :NATURE, CAUSING AND FORMS OF PATRIMONIAL LOSS Read the facts below and answer the questions that follow. Cornor McGregor, a 38-year-old South African male (also a US citizen), was driving his 2020 Mercedes-Benz C180 (registration AA 00 CD) on the R82 south of Johannesburg when he was struck from behind by a delivery van (registration BB 00 TT). The van, owned by HHT Bakeries (Pty) Ltd, lost control and caused the collision. HHT Bakeries has conceded liability. The accident occurred on 16 December 2019. At the time, Cornor was employed as an orthopaedic surgeon at a private hospital, earning more than R250 000 per month. He sustained the following injuries: soft tissue damage to the neck, a fractured left thumb, a fractured left toe, and a deep wound to his left temple. He remained in a coma for 21 days and thereafter spent four months recuperating at home. Having exhausted his paid sick leave, he received no income during this period. A psychologist later reported that Cornor suffered from severe intermittent memory loss. His employer subsequently terminated his contract, as he could no longer perform his duties. Cornor’s vehicle, valued at R1 200 000 before the accident, was written off and reduced to a wreck worth R600 000. He also lost an Apple watch (not available in South Africa at the time), which cost USD 2500. While his vehicle remained at the roadside overnight, thieves stole the vehicle’s battery (worth R45 000) and four wheels with rims (worth R80 000). Fourteen months after his dismissal, Cornor consults your office seeking advice on whom to sue for his losses. Answer the following questions: 3.1 State two patrimonial claims Cornor may institute against the Road Accident Fund and indicate the documents required to prove them. (4 marks) 3.2 Identify three of Cornor’s injuries for which he may NOT claim non-patrimonial damages from the Road Accident Fund and provide authority for your answer in the form of legislation and rules. (4 marks) LPL 4802_OCT/NOV EXAM Page 8 of 9 3.3 Explain why HHT Bakeries has rejected Cornor’s claim for the stolen wheels and battery. (2 marks) 3.4 Cornor wishes to claim the value of his Apple watch in USD from HHT Bakeries. With reference to authority, advise him on his prospects of success. (2 marks) 3.5 Apart from the Apple watch, what else may Cornor claim from HHT Bakeries? Explain why he cannot claim this from the Road Accident Fund, citing authority. (4marks) 3.6 Cornor urgently needs money to settle past hospital bills and support himself while awaiting the damages trial. Advise him on the legal mechanism available, with reference to legislation. (8 marks) 3.7 What is the Road Accident Fund Act July 2025 limit for claims of loss of income and loss of support? (1 mark) [25 marks] LPL 4802_OCT/NOV EXAM Page 9 of 9 QUESTION 4 (DRAFTING) Read the case Mdlekeza v Gallie 2021 (4) SA 531 (WCC) and answer the following. Note: Your answers must be accurate in both form and substance. You are encouraged to consult precedents when answering this section. 4.1 Draft a Notice of Motion, addressed to both the Registrar of the Court and the respondent, which the applicant in this case could have filed in respect of the alleged defamation. Your draft should conform as closely as possible to Form 2(a) of the First Schedule to the Uniform Rules. Do not include a founding affidavit. (10 marks) 4.2 Draft an Answering Affidavit that the respondent in this case could reasonably have filed in response to the allegations possibly made in the founding affidavit. Your version of the facts should correspond closely with the testimony recorded by Slingers J in the judgment. (15 marks)