Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Caroline Lydia Engelbrecht Versus the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund of Namibia

Caroline Lydia Engelbrecht Versus the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund of Namibia

Ratings: (0)|Views: 272|Likes:
Published by André Le Roux
A civil case dealing with the aspect of liability and proof thereof in cases regarding motor vehicle accidents in Namibia.
A civil case dealing with the aspect of liability and proof thereof in cases regarding motor vehicle accidents in Namibia.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: André Le Roux on May 12, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/14/2010

pdf

text

original

 
SUMMARY 
CASE NO.: I 2346/2005
CAROLINE LYDIA ENGELBRECHT
 and
THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT FUND OF NAMIBIA
 2007 November 15
PARKER, J
 _________________________________________________________________________
Negligence -
Action for damages in terms of repealed Motor VehicleAccident Fund Act (Act 30 of 1990) – Plaintiff allegingnegligence of insured driver and relying on,
inter alia
,maxim
res ipsa loquitur 
– Allegation of negligence notsufficient – Where plaintiff particularizes cause of accidentas ground of driver’s negligence in specific respects,plaintiff confined to such particularity – Depending onnature of accident mere happening of accident may justifyinference of negligence – Such inference underlying maxim
res ipsa loquitur 
– Inference does not shift burden of disproving negligence on defendant but casts evidentiaryburden on defendant to supply some degree of proof inrebuttal of inference – Insured driver foreseeing possibilityof accident and taking certain steps –
Onus
on plaintiff toestablish further steps which insured driver could and
 
2should have reasonably taken – Plaintiff failing to discharge
onus
to prove negligence of driver – Action failing.
 
3
CASE NO.: I 2346/2005IN THE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA
In the matter between
CAROLINE LYDIA ENGELBRECHT
Plaintiff and
THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT FUND OF NAMIBIA
Defendant
CORAM: PARKER, J
Heard on: 2006 June 26, 27, 28; 2007 October 29, 30, 31Delivered on: 2007 November 15______________________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT:PARKER, J:
[1] On 25 March 2001 the plaintiff was a fare-paying passenger in a Mazda pick-up(the insured vehicle), which was carrying her and 14 other passengers to Walvis Bay. Theinsured vehicle towed a trailer that contained the luggage of the passengers.[2] According to Mr. Kooitjie, the only defence witness and the driver of the insuredvehicle at the material time (the insured driver), between Okahandja and Karibib atbetween 14h00 and 16h00 as he was driving, the left, rear tyre of the insured vehiclesuddenly burst, and the insured vehicle veered to its left; he then held the steering wheeltight in his hands in order to make the insured “vehicle to stay or to be on the road becauseit was pulling towards the left side.” Thus, what he says is that he tried to keep the insuredvehicle on the road “but it did not and it still continued to pull out and then it went off the

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Andonya liked this
Andonya liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->