Private Law 373
(Law of Delict)
notes
Compiled by Mari Louw in 2021. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE.
MARIA MAGDALENA Louw [Date] [Course title]
, 1
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................7
Nature of the law of delict:.....................................................................................................7
Loss allocation and corrective justice................................................................................7
Regulatory framework........................................................................................................7
Morality..............................................................................................................................7
Definitions of a delict.............................................................................................................9
Functions of the law of Delict:.............................................................................................10
Compensation for harm suffered or interest infringed.....................................................10
Protects certain interests:..................................................................................................12
Promotes social cohesion:................................................................................................12
Educate and reinforce values:...........................................................................................12
Provide socially acceptable compromises between conflicting moral views:.................12
Deterrence........................................................................................................................12
Reallocate and spread losses:...........................................................................................13
Delict and insurance:............................................................................................................14
Remedies..............................................................................................................................17
Union Government (Min of Railways and Harbours) v Warneke...................................19
Fault and harm......................................................................................................................21
Harm.........................................................................................................................................23
Factual or normative question?............................................................................................25
Legal development due to normative considerations.......................................................25
Patrimonial v non-patrimonial harm....................................................................................27
How do we measure harm?..................................................................................................29
Jowell v Bramwell-Jones 2000 (3) SA 274 (SCA)..........................................................30
non-patrimonial harm:..........................................................................................................31
, 2
Pain and suffering.............................................................................................................31
Actio iniuriarum...............................................................................................................32
Personality rights and constitutional rights......................................................................38
Claim for wrongful life:.......................................................................................................41
Stewart v Botha 2008 SCA..............................................................................................41
H v Fetal Assessment Centre 2015 CC............................................................................45
Conduct....................................................................................................................................50
Conduct must be human:......................................................................................................50
Conduct must be voluntary:.................................................................................................51
Automatism defence:........................................................................................................52
Factual causation:.....................................................................................................................56
Minister of Police v Skosana 1977.......................................................................................57
Conditio sine qua non...........................................................................................................57
International Shipping Co (Pty) Ltd v Bentley 1990 (A):................................................57
Positive v negative conduct..............................................................................................58
Minister of Safety and Security v Van Duivenboden 2002 (6) SA 411 (SCA) par 25:....58
Conditio sine qua non in case law:...................................................................................58
Alternatives to conditio sine qua non test:...........................................................................62
(Material contribution to) increasing risk approach.........................................................64
Policy................................................................................................................................66
Human experience and knowledge:.................................................................................67
Loss of a chance doctrine.................................................................................................67
NESS test..........................................................................................................................68
Current common law position..........................................................................................69
Lee v Minister for Correctional Services 2013 CC..............................................................70
Legal causation:........................................................................................................................75
Flexible approach:................................................................................................................76
, 3
Approaches before flexible approach/ before Mokgethi (1990)......................................76
Approach after Mokgethi: flexible approach...................................................................76
Subsidiary tests under the flexible approach:...................................................................79
Fault..........................................................................................................................................91
1. Accountability:.................................................................................................................93
Grounds excluding accountability:...................................................................................95
2) Intention:........................................................................................................................109
Dolus directus:................................................................................................................109
Dolus indirectus:.............................................................................................................109
Dolus eventualis:............................................................................................................109
1st component: direction of will:.....................................................................................110
2nd component: consciousness of wrongfulness.............................................................111
Special cases where direction of will alone is sufficient:...............................................111
Difference between motive and intention:.....................................................................112
Proving intention:...........................................................................................................112
Defences that exclude intention:....................................................................................113
3) Negligence.....................................................................................................................114
Loureiro v Imvula Quality Protection 2014 (CC):.........................................................116
Characteristics of a reasonable person...........................................................................119
The test for negligence:..................................................................................................119
Factors that indicate the required standard of care:........................................................131
Proof of negligence:.......................................................................................................135
Wrongfulness..........................................................................................................................137
Point of departure:..............................................................................................................137
Historical overview of development of law relating to wrongfulness:..............................138
Wrongfulness of an omission?.......................................................................................139
Causation of pure economic loss?..................................................................................141
(Law of Delict)
notes
Compiled by Mari Louw in 2021. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE.
MARIA MAGDALENA Louw [Date] [Course title]
, 1
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................7
Nature of the law of delict:.....................................................................................................7
Loss allocation and corrective justice................................................................................7
Regulatory framework........................................................................................................7
Morality..............................................................................................................................7
Definitions of a delict.............................................................................................................9
Functions of the law of Delict:.............................................................................................10
Compensation for harm suffered or interest infringed.....................................................10
Protects certain interests:..................................................................................................12
Promotes social cohesion:................................................................................................12
Educate and reinforce values:...........................................................................................12
Provide socially acceptable compromises between conflicting moral views:.................12
Deterrence........................................................................................................................12
Reallocate and spread losses:...........................................................................................13
Delict and insurance:............................................................................................................14
Remedies..............................................................................................................................17
Union Government (Min of Railways and Harbours) v Warneke...................................19
Fault and harm......................................................................................................................21
Harm.........................................................................................................................................23
Factual or normative question?............................................................................................25
Legal development due to normative considerations.......................................................25
Patrimonial v non-patrimonial harm....................................................................................27
How do we measure harm?..................................................................................................29
Jowell v Bramwell-Jones 2000 (3) SA 274 (SCA)..........................................................30
non-patrimonial harm:..........................................................................................................31
, 2
Pain and suffering.............................................................................................................31
Actio iniuriarum...............................................................................................................32
Personality rights and constitutional rights......................................................................38
Claim for wrongful life:.......................................................................................................41
Stewart v Botha 2008 SCA..............................................................................................41
H v Fetal Assessment Centre 2015 CC............................................................................45
Conduct....................................................................................................................................50
Conduct must be human:......................................................................................................50
Conduct must be voluntary:.................................................................................................51
Automatism defence:........................................................................................................52
Factual causation:.....................................................................................................................56
Minister of Police v Skosana 1977.......................................................................................57
Conditio sine qua non...........................................................................................................57
International Shipping Co (Pty) Ltd v Bentley 1990 (A):................................................57
Positive v negative conduct..............................................................................................58
Minister of Safety and Security v Van Duivenboden 2002 (6) SA 411 (SCA) par 25:....58
Conditio sine qua non in case law:...................................................................................58
Alternatives to conditio sine qua non test:...........................................................................62
(Material contribution to) increasing risk approach.........................................................64
Policy................................................................................................................................66
Human experience and knowledge:.................................................................................67
Loss of a chance doctrine.................................................................................................67
NESS test..........................................................................................................................68
Current common law position..........................................................................................69
Lee v Minister for Correctional Services 2013 CC..............................................................70
Legal causation:........................................................................................................................75
Flexible approach:................................................................................................................76
, 3
Approaches before flexible approach/ before Mokgethi (1990)......................................76
Approach after Mokgethi: flexible approach...................................................................76
Subsidiary tests under the flexible approach:...................................................................79
Fault..........................................................................................................................................91
1. Accountability:.................................................................................................................93
Grounds excluding accountability:...................................................................................95
2) Intention:........................................................................................................................109
Dolus directus:................................................................................................................109
Dolus indirectus:.............................................................................................................109
Dolus eventualis:............................................................................................................109
1st component: direction of will:.....................................................................................110
2nd component: consciousness of wrongfulness.............................................................111
Special cases where direction of will alone is sufficient:...............................................111
Difference between motive and intention:.....................................................................112
Proving intention:...........................................................................................................112
Defences that exclude intention:....................................................................................113
3) Negligence.....................................................................................................................114
Loureiro v Imvula Quality Protection 2014 (CC):.........................................................116
Characteristics of a reasonable person...........................................................................119
The test for negligence:..................................................................................................119
Factors that indicate the required standard of care:........................................................131
Proof of negligence:.......................................................................................................135
Wrongfulness..........................................................................................................................137
Point of departure:..............................................................................................................137
Historical overview of development of law relating to wrongfulness:..............................138
Wrongfulness of an omission?.......................................................................................139
Causation of pure economic loss?..................................................................................141
