LPL4802
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2025
Detailed Solutions, References & Explanations
Unique number:
Due Date: 28 March 2025
QUESTION 1 (3 DETAILED ANSWERS PROVIDED)
SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE APPROACHES TO PATRIMONIAL LOSS: A CRITICAL
DISCUSSION OF RUDMAN V ROAD ACCIDENT FUND 2003 (2) SA 234 (SCA)
1. INTRODUCTION
In the law of delict (and similarly in contract), damages generally serve to compensate the
injured party by placing them in the position they would have occupied had the delict (or
breach) not occurred. South African law usually employs an objective standard to ascertain
the financial prejudice a plaintiff has suffered. Yet, over the years, courts and commentators
have debated whether damages should sometimes be assessed through a subjective lens,
considering the specific circumstances and personal intentions of the plaintiff.
In Rudman v Road Accident Fund 2003 (2) SA 234 (SCA), the Supreme Court of Appeal had
to consider whether the plaintiff, Mr Rudman, had suffered a personal (subjective) patrimonial
Terms of use
loss flowing from a motor vehicle accident—particularlyByinmaking usethe
light of of this
factdocument you agree to:
that Rudman
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2025
Detailed Solutions, References & Explanations
Unique number:
Due Date: 28 March 2025
QUESTION 1 (3 DETAILED ANSWERS PROVIDED)
SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE APPROACHES TO PATRIMONIAL LOSS: A CRITICAL
DISCUSSION OF RUDMAN V ROAD ACCIDENT FUND 2003 (2) SA 234 (SCA)
1. INTRODUCTION
In the law of delict (and similarly in contract), damages generally serve to compensate the
injured party by placing them in the position they would have occupied had the delict (or
breach) not occurred. South African law usually employs an objective standard to ascertain
the financial prejudice a plaintiff has suffered. Yet, over the years, courts and commentators
have debated whether damages should sometimes be assessed through a subjective lens,
considering the specific circumstances and personal intentions of the plaintiff.
In Rudman v Road Accident Fund 2003 (2) SA 234 (SCA), the Supreme Court of Appeal had
to consider whether the plaintiff, Mr Rudman, had suffered a personal (subjective) patrimonial
Terms of use
loss flowing from a motor vehicle accident—particularlyByinmaking usethe
light of of this
factdocument you agree to:
that Rudman
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
