Phillipa Susan Van Zyl N.O v Road Accident Fund

dc.date.accessioned	2021-01-19T09:57:33Z
dc.date.available	2021-01-19T09:57:33Z
dc.identifier.citation	[2021] ZACC 44
dc.identifier.citation	2022 (2) BCLR 215 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation	2022 (3) SA 45 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/36728
dc.title	Phillipa Susan Van Zyl N.O v Road Accident Fund	en_US
dc.identifier.casenumber	CCT 114/20
dc.date.hearing	2 March 2021
dc.contributor.judge	Pillay AJ (main); Jafta J (majority)
dc.contributor.judge	Theron J (dissenting)
dc.date.judgment	19 November 2021
dc.link.judgment	https://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/36728/%5bJudgment%5d%20CCT%20114-20%20Van%20Zyl%20v%20RAF.pdf?sequence=22&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis	Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996 — section 23(1) — section 23(2)(b) and (c) — prescription of claim against the Road Accident Fund — claimants of unsound mind — prescription only begins to run from date of appointment of curator ad litem Interpretation — impossibility principle — the law does not require impossibilities
dc.concourt.casehistory	On appeal from the Supreme Court of Appeal (hearing an appeal from the High Court of South Africa, Eastern Cape Division, (Grahamstown)

Files in this item

[Pre-Hearing Media Summary] CCT 114-20 Phillipa Susan Van Zyl NO v Road ....docx ( 45.31Kb )

SCA Judgment 114-20.pdf ( 568.9Kb )

EC Judgment.pdf ( 1.379Mb )

Respondent's note in terms of practice direction11420.pdf ( 92.39Kb )

Respondent's Heads of Argument11420.pdf ( 171.9Kb )

Applicant's Supplementary Practice note11420.pdf ( 53.87Kb )

Applicant's Heads of Argument11420.pdf ( 345.1Kb )

01Respondent's Answering Affidavit11420.pdf ( 5.179Mb )

02Applicant's Notice of Motion and Founding Affidavit11420.pdf ( 1.704Mb )

[Post-Judgment Media Summary] CCT 114-21 Van Zyl NO v RAF.pdf ( 139.1Kb )

[Judgment] CCT 114-20 Van Zyl v RAF.pdf ( 610.9Kb )