Garantie de satisfaction à 100% Disponible immédiatement après paiement En ligne et en PDF Tu n'es attaché à rien 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Examen

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

Vendu
54
Pages
18
Qualité
A+
Publié le
26-10-2025
Écrit en
2025/2026

LPL4802 October November Portfolio (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2025 - DUE 30 October 2025; 100% TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and explanations. For assistance, Whats-App 0.6.7-1.7.1-1.7.3.9. Ensure your success with us....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)

Montrer plus Lire moins
Établissement
Cours









Oups ! Impossible de charger votre document. Réessayez ou contactez le support.

Livre connecté

École, étude et sujet

Établissement
Cours

Infos sur le Document

Publié le
26 octobre 2025
Nombre de pages
18
Écrit en
2025/2026
Type
Examen
Contenu
Questions et réponses

Sujets

Aperçu du contenu

LPL4802
October November Portfolio Semester 2 2025
Unique number: 689535
Due Date: 30 October 2025

QUESTION 1: NATURE AND ASSESSMENT OF NON-PATRIMONIAL LOSS (INJURY TO
PERSONALITY)

1.1

The Supreme Court of Appeal in MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government v AAS
obo CMMS made it very clear that the trial court misunderstood how to properly make use of
previous awards in similar cases. The court explained that while it is essential to refer to
comparable cases when assessing general damages for non-patrimonial loss, they must
only serve as guidance and not be used as a binding rule. The court referred to De Jongh v
Du Pisanie, where it was stated that the primary principle remains the discretion of the court.
Comparable cases help create a framework of fairness and consistency but should not take
away the court’s power to decide what is just in the specific matter before it.1

In this case, the court criticised the High Court for relying too heavily on comparisons with
past awards without carefully weighing the unique facts and circumstances of the plaintiff’s
injuries. The court stressed that general damages should not be treated like items on a price
Terms of use
list where each injury has a fixed amount. Instead, courts should consider various factors
By making use of this document you agree to:
such as  Use the
the age of the plaintiff, this document
severity asofa guide for learning,
the injuries, comparison
medical and reference
treatment purpose,
received,
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, or and
reference, 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.

, +27 67 171 1739



QUESTION 1: NATURE AND ASSESSMENT OF NON-PATRIMONIAL LOSS (INJURY
TO PERSONALITY)

1.1

The Supreme Court of Appeal in MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government v AAS
obo CMMS made it very clear that the trial court misunderstood how to properly make use
of previous awards in similar cases. The court explained that while it is essential to refer to
comparable cases when assessing general damages for non-patrimonial loss, they must
only serve as guidance and not be used as a binding rule. The court referred to De Jongh
v Du Pisanie, where it was stated that the primary principle remains the discretion of the
court. Comparable cases help create a framework of fairness and consistency but should
not take away the court’s power to decide what is just in the specific matter before it.1

In this case, the court criticised the High Court for relying too heavily on comparisons with
past awards without carefully weighing the unique facts and circumstances of the plaintiff’s
injuries. The court stressed that general damages should not be treated like items on a
price list where each injury has a fixed amount. Instead, courts should consider various
factors such as the age of the plaintiff, the severity of the injuries, medical treatment
received, emotional and physical suffering, and the long-term impact on the plaintiff’s life.2

The court leaned on the well-known principle established in Protea Assurance Co Ltd v
Lamb, where it was emphasised that the comparison of cases should not become a
detailed audit of old judgments. Rather, the process should help judges come to a fair
amount that aligns with previous awards in similar circumstances, ensuring that their
decision is not completely out of step with what has been awarded in other cases.3

It was also made clear that these comparisons need to take into account the changing
value of money over time. A previous award from many years ago cannot be used at face
value without adjusting for inflation. The court acknowledged that the value of damages
should reflect present-day currency values and purchasing power. This helps maintain
fairness and consistency in compensation.4



1
MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government v AAS obo CMMS (401/2023) [2025] ZASCA 91, para 38.
2
MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government v AAS obo CMMS, para 36.
3
Protea Assurance Co Ltd v Lamb 1971 (1) SA 530 (A).
4
MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government v AAS obo CMMS, para 44.
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.
2,65 €
Accéder à l'intégralité du document:
Acheté par 54 étudiants

Garantie de satisfaction à 100%
Disponible immédiatement après paiement
En ligne et en PDF
Tu n'es attaché à rien

Avis des acheteurs vérifiés

Affichage de tous les 6 avis
2 mois de cela

2 mois de cela

2 mois de cela

2 mois de cela

2 mois de cela

2 mois de cela

4,5

6 revues

5
4
4
1
3
1
2
0
1
0
Avis fiables sur Stuvia

Tous les avis sont réalisés par de vrais utilisateurs de Stuvia après des achats vérifiés.

Faites connaissance avec le vendeur

Seller avatar
Les scores de réputation sont basés sur le nombre de documents qu'un vendeur a vendus contre paiement ainsi que sur les avis qu'il a reçu pour ces documents. Il y a trois niveaux: Bronze, Argent et Or. Plus la réputation est bonne, plus vous pouvez faire confiance sur la qualité du travail des vendeurs.
EduPal University of South Africa (Unisa)
S'abonner Vous devez être connecté afin de pouvoir suivre les étudiants ou les formations
Vendu
149203
Membre depuis
7 année
Nombre de followers
35996
Documents
4352
Dernière vente
8 heures de cela

4,2

13562 revues

5
7808
4
2689
3
1791
2
455
1
819

Récemment consulté par vous

Pourquoi les étudiants choisissent Stuvia

Créé par d'autres étudiants, vérifié par les avis

Une qualité sur laquelle compter : rédigé par des étudiants qui ont réussi et évalué par d'autres qui ont utilisé ce document.

Le document ne convient pas ? Choisis un autre document

Aucun souci ! Tu peux sélectionner directement un autre document qui correspond mieux à ce que tu cherches.

Paye comme tu veux, apprends aussitôt

Aucun abonnement, aucun engagement. Paye selon tes habitudes par carte de crédit et télécharge ton document PDF instantanément.

Student with book image

“Acheté, téléchargé et réussi. C'est aussi simple que ça.”

Alisha Student

Foire aux questions