Basson N.O obo Moruke v Road Accident Fund (039326/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1053 (2 October 2025)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPPHC 1053 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Basson N.O obo Moruke v Road Accident Fund (039326/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1053 (2 October 2025) Basson N.O obo Moruke v Road Accident Fund (039326/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1053 (2 October 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2025_1053.html sino date 2 October 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVSION, PRETORIA CASE NO 039326/2022 (1) REPORTABLE:  NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3) REVISED. DATE  2/10/2025 SIGNATURE In the matter between: Adv Heila Basson N.O obo                                               Applicant/Plaintiff Sarah Morongwa Moruke and ROAD ACCIDENT FUND                                                    Respondent/Defendant JUDGMENT PIENAAR (AJ) Introduction 1. On 9 May 2001, Ms Sarah Morongwa Moruke was involved in a motor vehicle accident. As a result of the accident, she suffered skull fracture right occipital bone, basal skull fracture and sustained a blow to the head and she lost consciousness. 2.  On 31January 2002 a claim was lodged by T.P Magoro Attorneys with the Road Accident Fund. 3.  On 31October 2022 a Combined Summons was served on the Defendant by the Sheriff, C.F Nel. Therefore, twenty-one years later, the Combined Summons was served on the Defendant. 4.  On 13 March 2023, before the Honourable Judge Lenyai, Adv. Heila Johanna Basson was appointed as Curator ad Litem. 5. The Defendant filed a Notice of Intention to Defend on18 April 2024. The Plaintiff served a Notice of Bar on the Defendant on 23 May 2024. 6.  This matter was on the default judgment roll for 2 July 2025. When the matter was called, there was no appearance for the RAF, despite due notice of the trial date being given to it. The matter proceeded on a default basis. 7. After hearing the Plaintiff's Counsel, Adv. Snyman SC, with Adv. Ernst, I reserved judgment. Prescription 8.  Adv Snyman SC referred the Court of the Constitutional court judgment in Van Zyl N.O vs RAF [2021] ZACC 44 , prescription of claims against the Road accident Fund, where the claimants are of unsound mind, prescription only beings to run from date of appointment of Curator ad Litem . The Plaintiff’s Heads of Argument, paragraph 1.14.1 reads as follows: “It should be noted that this matter was originally issued in the Magistrate Court, Tshwane Central by the patient’s previous attorneys of record, Digaba Tlhabane Attorneys. The matter did not reach any finality in the Magistrate’s Court as the previous attorneys of record failed to execute their mandate properly and failed to appoint any expert witness” 9.  The Plaintiff’s Heads of Argument, at paragraph 1.14.1, cannot introduce new information that was not pleaded in the Particulars of Claim. 10. There were previous attorneys on record who were supposed to issue summons within a five-year period, but this was not done. According to the Plaintiff’s counsel, the summons was issued out of the Magistrate’s Court. However, as mentioned previously, this was neither pleaded in the Particulars of Claim nor uploaded onto CaseLines. Conclusion 11. The court is of the view that this matter has prescribed. The Plaintiff has not pleaded in the Particulars of Claim that there were any previous attorneys on record, that summons had been issued out of the Magistrate’s Court, or provided any background history of the matter. The only averment made by the Plaintiff is that they were involved in a motor vehicle accident on 9 May 2001, and that the Combined Summons was served on the Defendant twenty-one years later. Order 1. The application is dismissed. 2. No order as to costs M PIENAAR ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF THE GAUTENG DIVISION The judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties’ representatives by email, by being uploaded to CaseLines. The date for hand down is deemed to be 1 October 2025. Heard on                :  2 July 2025 Delivered on           :  2 October 2025 Appearances On behalf of the Plaintiff                         : Adv M Snyman SC with Adv JRF Ernst Instructed by                                         : Andre Du Plessis Inc Attorneys On behalf of the Defendant                    : Road Accident Fund No appearance Link no: 1043934 sino noindex make_database footer start