The RAF has failed to have a Feb­ru­ary 2024 Gauteng High Court (Johan­nes­burg) order award­ing more than R5.5m for loss of earn­ings to an acci­dent vic­tim, res­cin­ded.

The same court, in its rul­ing passed yes­ter­day by Act­ing Judge Prince Verveen, found that the RAF was rep­res­en­ted when the ori­ginal order was gran­ted and had failed to provide a suf­fi­cient explan­a­tion for its delay in fil­ing its res­cis­sion applic­a­tion. 

Business Day reports that the judg­ment is sig­ni­fic­ant for the RAF because it rein­forces the lim­its of its abil­ity to reopen com­pens­a­tion orders after judg­ment, in par­tic­u­lar if the fund was rep­res­en­ted at the ori­ginal hear­ing but failed to prop­erly advance its case.

The fund had applied under Uni­form Rule 42 and the com­mon law to res­cind the order gran­ted by the court on 16 Feb­ru­ary 2024 that dir­ec­ted the RAF to pay R5.5m for the claimant’s loss of earn­ings.

The RAF was served with the judg­ment by Feb­ru­ary 25 2024 and it served the res­cis­sion applic­a­tion on Novem­ber 28 2024.

Verveen said in the cur­rent pro­ceed­ings that the found­ing affi­davit by RAF stated its rep­res­ent­at­ive was not present in court.

‘The RAF has now con­ceded that the alleg­a­tion in its found­ing affi­davit that it was absent when the order was gran­ted is incor­rect,’ he said.

Verveen said the Feb­ru­ary 2024 order was not erro­neously sought or gran­ted.

The judge said the explan­a­tion for the about nine-month delay in bring­ing the res­cis­sion applic­a­tion was inad­equate.

Full Business Day report

Judgment