africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • Ghana
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Uganda

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[2025] ZAGPJHC 401South Africa

Howell v Road Accident Fund (2019/28805) [2025] ZAGPJHC 401 (23 April 2025)

High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)
23 April 2025
WRIGHT J, HERBERT JA, Respondent J, Wright J

Judgment

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: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPJHC 401 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Howell v Road Accident Fund (2019/28805) [2025] ZAGPJHC 401 (23 April 2025) Howell v Road Accident Fund (2019/28805) [2025] ZAGPJHC 401 (23 April 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2025_401.html sino date 23 April 2025 ###### IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 2019/28805 1. Reportable: No 2. Of interest to other judges: No 3. Revised 23 APRIL 2025 WRIGHT J HOWELL, HERBERT JAMES KNOCKIES                                  Applicant and ROAD ACCIDENT FUND                                                             Respondent JUDGMENT WRIGHT J 1. In this trial in which the plaintiff, Mr Howell claims damages from the RAF arising out of an alleged motor bike accident in 2017, Mr A Louw who appears for Mr Howell, asks that the trial proceed. 2. It would appear that there is agreement that the question of the merits be separated from that of quantum. 3. The RAF denies liability. 4. The matter was set down for trial starting yesterday, 22 April 2025. The matter was allocated to me yesterday afternoon and I was able to proceed today, over Teams, at 12 noon. Mr Madesele for the RAF had requested that I start today at 12 noon. There is some dispute between Mr Louw and Mr Madesele as to precisely who is to blame for the matter not proceeding earlier today than 12 noon. 5. The matter is not ripe for trial. 6. The RAF has not discovered and this morning it uploaded to caselines various documents, some of which are barely legible. 7. The newly uploaded documents include a copy of the police docket and include an apparent statement by Mr Howell to the police made in 2018 in which Mr Howell allegedly said that he remembered nothing of the accident. 8. Mr Louw indicated that he would call Mr Howell and possibly two other witnesses on the merits. 9. Mr Madesele indicated that he would seek to cross-examine Mr Howell on his alleged statement to the police in 2018. 10. During the course of debate, Mr Louw agreed that Mr Howell had made an affidavit dated 19 March 2018, at caselines 19-101 to 19-102, which is accurate and made freely and voluntarily. This affidavit, it was agreed by Mr Louw, could be used by Mr Madesele in cross-examining Mr Howell. 11. However, the alleged statement by Mr Howell to the police in 2018 would be the subject of a trial within a trial. Mr Madesele would not be allowed to cross-examine Mr Howell on this statement until its admissibility is proved. This is because Mr Louw disputed the admissibility of the 2018 statement. 12. Regarding costs, it appears, and I put it no higher than that, that Mr Howell in fact made a statement to the police in 2018. He has not discovered this statement. 13. Costs should be reserved. In due course the truth about the 2018 statement will hopefully be revealed. It is then that a proper finding about all the possible causes for the matter not proceeding today can be made. 14. Mr Madesele agreed to a suggestion by Mr Louw that the RAF discover by 5 May 2025 and that failing such discovery Mr Howell could apply for the striking of the defence and the entering of judgment. ORDER 1. The matter is removed from the roll. 2. Costs reserved. 3. The defendant is to discover by 4pm on 5 May 2025, failing which the plaintiff may apply for the striking of the defence and the entering of judgment in favour of the plaintiff. GC Wright Judge of the High Court Gauteng Division, Johannesburg HEARD: 23 April 2025 DELIVERED: 23 April 2025 APPEARANCES     : Plaintiff                Adv A Louw antonlouw@law.co.za Instructed by Potgieter R Attorneys rudolph@potgieterattorneys.co.za Defendant            Att M Madesele matimuma@raf.co.za Instructed by       Road Accident Fund sino noindex make_database footer start

Similar Cases

Howell v Freese (11341/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 458 (11 May 2023)
[2023] ZAGPJHC 458High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Howe v Platform 45 (Pty) Ltd (13158/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 409 (29 April 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 409High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
F.H.M v Road Accident Fund (2023/071933) [2025] ZAGPJHC 398 (17 April 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 398High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar
S.A.H v S.B.H (2025/095199) [2025] ZAGPJHC 760 (23 July 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 760High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar
M.H v S.S.H (Appeal) (A2025/055489) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1164 (6 November 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1164High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar

Discussion