Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Delict in RDL (injuria (injury). (To Prove (i. A wrongful act by D, ii.…

- - - - Dolus
      - Culpa
  - - - Cape of Good Hope Bank,
        
        "not limited to corporeal property, extended to every kind of loss sustained by a person "
  - - - Should be legally wrong
        
        However, not all acts which cause loss or foreseeable harm are wrongful in the eyes of the law
        
        [Exception] Mckerron's classification
        
        i. Prior Conduct
        
        S.A.R. v Estate Saunders
        
        the defendant delivered good in a trailer and left it inside the promises for the consignee's servant to unload.After unloading the servants pushed the trailer out and placed it in the opposite side of the road to be collected the following day. During the course of the night the plaintiffs bus collided with the trailer, whiletraveling along the road, which was not lit.
        
        Silva's Fishing Corporation (Pvt) Limited v Maweza
        
        Hallwell v Johannesburg Municipality
        
        plaintiff was driving a horse and a cart along the street. The horse slipped on cobbles laid along the edge of the tram lines by the defendant and the plaintiff was thrown out and injured.
        
        1 more item...
        
        ii. Control of Danger things
        
        Definition
        
        Liability is created from an omission where a person is in control of a thing, movable or immovable which unless due precaution are taken, may cause harm to others
        
        Silva's Fishing Corporation (Pty) Ltd v Maweza
        
        Cambridge Municipality v Millard
        
        Plaintiff owned property adjoining the municipal street. The municipality allowed a quantity of grass to remain on the side walk alongside the property.The grass was liable to catch fire and the municipality was aware of it.A fire broke out and the property of the plaintiff was destroyed.Plaintiff was awarded damages on the grounds that the defendantswere guilty of neglect in allowing the grass to be brown.
        
        iii. Relationship of Parties
        
        i.e. An employer is clearly under the duty to procure prompt medical assistance for employee who is injured./// Railway authorities would be liable in respect of an injury caused to passengers due to a railway accident
        
        Mtati v Minister of Justice
        
        gaoler (a person in charge of a jail or of the prisoners in it) was under the duty to take due precautions to protect a detainees form unlawful assault.
        
        Silva's Fishing Corporation (Pvt) Limited v Maweza
        
        iv. Statute
        
        The owners of machinery could be required by statute to fence off securely all exposed machinery which when in motion may be dangerous to persons
        
        v. Public office or Calling
        
        def :Positive duties are imposed upon persons occupying certain offices or carrying out calling of a public nature.
        
        Cope of Good Hope Bank v Fisher
        
        court held that the Registrar of Deeds owed a duty to a creditor who had advances money in consideration of a bond when passed before him and that if he fails to do so and thereby losses preference the creditor will have action for damages.
    - - Dolus
        
        intentional / wrongful intend/ an act
        
        McKerron
        
        law judges a man's intentions by his conduct and presumes that the intended the natural and necessary consequences of his act
        
        Can be
        
        Intention
        
        consequences are foreseen and desired.
        
        Knowledge
        
        knowledge of the act and its probable and foreseeable
        consequence
        
        Duty to refrain
        
        Every person is under a duty to refrain from committing an act which would cause injury without lawful justification unless it would not be wrongful
      - Culpa
        
        Negligence / unreasonable risk of harm to others
        
        Conduct a Reasonable Prudent man wouldn't do
        
        Omission reasonable prudent man wouldn't do
        
        :warning: No Negligence if no duty of care
        
        therefore, P needs to Prove
        
        i. Duty of Care
        
        must take reasonable care to avoid acts / omissions which he can reasonable foresee as would be likely to injure his neighbor
        
        Neighbor : is a person so closely and directly affected by D's act
        
        1 more item...
        
        Cape Town Municipality v Paine Standard Duty of care / Standard Reasonable Man - Depends on the case
        
        3 more items...
        
        No Duty of Care
        
        3 more items...
        
        ii. Breach of Duty of Care
        
        Breach is the failure to employ a :red_flag:degree of care that a reasonably prudent man would exercise, being in the same circumstances as D (objective Test)
        
        Decree of Care
        
        2 more items...
        
        Onus of Proving
        
        Section 101 Evidence
        Ordinance "He who asserts must prove."
        
        Plaintiff on balance probability
        
        i. D is guilty of Negligence
        
        ii. P's injury is attributable to D's negligence
        
        Where no direct evidence of negligence is available
        
        negligence can be inferred by facts:The available evidence must be sufficient to reasonably draw an inference. The deduction must be reasonable for it to become proof
        
        Wakelin v London and South Western
        Railway
        
        husband found dead near a railways crossing. Engine had light on but did not whistle. No evidence as to how the deceased came to be on the railway line. No evidence that the cause of death was due to failure to whistle, Held: No sufficient facts to establish that D was liable.
    - - Patrimonial Loss
        
        Def : The loss may be actual in respect of property or business or it may be in respect of prospective gains ( :warning: exception compensation )
      - Union Govt. I/ Warneke
        
        P brought an action for deprivation of comfort and companionship and her assistance in raising the children
        
        Assistance (i.e. / clothing / raising ) :check:
        
        comfort and companionship :red_cross:
        
        :warning:Exception to the rule that patrimonial loss must be proved in instances where the reason for bringing the action is not to claim compensation but rather to establish a right which is disputed.