CCT38/10

[2010] ZACC 25

2011 (1) SA 400 (CC)

2011 (2) BCLR 150 (CC)

Moseneke DCJ

25 November 2010

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3612

Application for leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the North Gauteng High Court: Law Society of South Africa and Others v Minister of Transport and Another, Case No 10654/09, North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, 31 March 2010, unreported.

The Court dealt with constitutional challenges to certain provisions of the 2005 amendment to the Road Accident Fund Act which related to abolishing road accident victims' residual common law right to claim losses which were not compensable under the Act; a provision limiting the amount of compensation that the Road Accident Fund was obliged to pay pursuant to claims for loss of income or a dependent's loss of support; and a regulation in which the Minister for Transport had prescribed medical tariffs for health services provided to accident victims by public health establishments. The Court applied its established rationality standard and found the abolition of claimants' residual common law claims a necessary and rational part of an interim legislative scheme whose primary thrust was to achieve financial viability, and a more effective and equitable platform for the delivery of social security services. The Court found the abolition of the common law residual claim was a justifiable limitation on the security of the person, that the cap on compensation for loss of income and of dependents' support did not infringe the right to property and that the right to adequate remedy was not infringed. The applicants' attack on the constitutional validity of the medical tariff for health services prescribed by the Minister was, however, successful. On the facts, the Court found the tariff to be wholly inadequate and unsuited for paying compensation for the medical treatment of road accident victims in the private health care sector. The tariff was found to be irrational as it was incapable of achieving the purpose the Minister was seeking to achieve, namely to enable innocent road accident victims to obtain the health services they require. It declared the regulation unconstitutional and made an order obliging the Minister to make a fresh determination. Judgment: Moseneke DCJ (unanimous).