Pearton v Road Accident Fund (39667/17) [2022] ZAGPPHC 468 (20 June 2022)

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 >> 2022 >> [2022] ZAGPPHC 468 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Pearton v Road Accident Fund (39667/17) [2022] ZAGPPHC 468 (20 June 2022) Pearton v Road Accident Fund (39667/17) [2022] ZAGPPHC 468 (20 June 2022) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2022_468.html sino date 20 June 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA Case number: 39667/17 REPORTABLE: NO OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO REVISED: YES 20 JUNE 2022 JEAN-RAY PEARTON PLAINTIFF And THE ROAD ACCIDENT FUND                                                                DEFENDANT Delivered: this judgment was prepared and authored by the judge whose name is reflected herein and is handed down electronically and by circulation to the parties/their legal representatives by email and by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on CaseLines. JUDGMENT LESO AJ INTRODUCTION [1]        Plaintiff filed leave to appeal the decision of the court dated 12 April 2022 whereby the plaintiff’s claim for loss of earnings and earning capacity was dismissed. [2]        The plaintiff’s grounds for leave to appeal mainly rest firstly, on the court’s rejection of some of the expert's opinions regarding the loss of earnings and earning capacity. Secondly, the plaintiff’s application rests on the ground court’s analysis of the evidence, the rejection of evidence and the short or brief analysis of inconsistencies that were identified in the evidence before me. CONCLUSION [3]        I have read your papers and having heard the counsel’s submission, I make the findings as follows: 3.1 that no court will come to a different conclusion; 3.2 that the applicant has no prospect of success in the appeal; 3.3 that there is no question of law that needs ventilation by the Supreme Court of Appeal. [4]        Having stated the above, I, therefore, stand by my analysis of evidence and my judgment that the plaintiff has not discharged the onus to prove that he is entitled to loss of earning or loss of earning capacity. ACCORDINGLY, I MAKE THE FOLLOWING ORDER : 1]         Plaintiff’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 2]         No order as to costs. Counsel obo Plaintiff:         Adv JF Mullins SC (082 928 0718) Adv. L. Coetzee (083 324 9540) Gildenhuys Malatji Inc. Obo Defendant:                 Unrepresented JT LESO Acting Judge of the High Court Date of Hearing:             20 June 2022 Judgment Delivered:      20 June 2022 For the Plaintiff:              Mullins SC Attorney:                         HW THERON INC Contact No:                    012 347 2000 Email Address:               ronel@hwtinc.co.za For the Defendant:         Unrepresented sino noindex make_database footer start