CCT29/14

[2014] ZACC 21

2014 (8) BCLR 917 (CC)

2014 (5) SA 573 (CC)

Froneman J

19 June 2014

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3762

Application for confirmation of an order of constitutional invalidity of the Free State High Court: Da Silva v Road Accident Fund and Another (1349/2008) [2014] ZAFSHC 249 (24 January 2014).

Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996 — constitutionality of section 19(b)(ii) prior to 2008 amendment — section is unconstitutional Section 9 of the Constitution — unfair discrimination — section 19(b)(ii) fails the Harksen test. Application for confirmation of an order of invalidity of section 19(b)(ii) of the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996 (old Act). Section 19(b)(ii) of the old Act excluded the Road Accident Fund (RAF) from liability when the claimant is a passenger in a vehicle driven by a member of that claimant’s household or when the claimant is responsible in law for the maintenance of the driver. Although the Road Accident Fund Amendment Act 19 of 2005 abolished section 19(b)(ii) of the old Act, the amending provision came into effect only on 1 August 2008. Claims that arose before this date continued to fall under the old Act. The Court held that the restriction in section 19(b)(ii) of the old Act is unconstitutional in that it discriminates unfairly between categories of people, namely those who have a close familial relationship with the driver and those who do not. In particular, because it is more likely to impact the children or spouses of drivers, the provision was found to discriminate against claimants on the basis of their age and marital status. The order of the High Court was therefore confirmed. Judgment: Froneman J (unanimous).