Introduction

Personal injury claims arise when someone is harmed due to another party’s actions or negligence but understanding how these cases are decided can be complex. Key legal principles – such as duty of care, negligence, and contributory negligence – play a crucial role in determining who is responsible and how much compensation may be awarded. This article explains these important concepts in straightforward terms to help you better understand your rights and responsibilities in personal injury cases.

Duty of Care

• Duty of care is a foundational principle in personal injury law, requiring individuals or entities (such as property owners) to ensure their premises or actions do not pose unreasonable risks to others. For example, property owners must maintain safe environments for visitors, and failure to do so can result in liability if someone is injured.

Negligence

• Negligence occurs when a party breaches their duty of care, resulting in harm to another person. To establish negligence in a personal injury claim, four elements must be proven:
  • The defendant owed a duty of care to the claimant.
  • The defendant breached that duty.
  • The breach directly caused the claimant’s injury (causation).
  • The claimant suffered actual damages (physical, psychological, or financial harm) as a result.
• Courts often use the “but for” test to determine causation: Would the injury have occurred but for the defendant’s actions? If not, the defendant may be found negligent.

Contributory Negligence

• Contributory negligence arises when the injured party’s own actions contribute to their harm. If a claimant is found partially responsible for their injuries, their compensation may be reduced proportionally to their degree of fault.
• For instance, if a person ignores safety instructions or fails to use provided safety equipment, and this contributes to their injury, the court may find contributory negligence.
• The process involves:
  • Investigating the incident and gathering evidence (witness statements, CCTV, reports).
  • Assessing the claimant’s actions against what a reasonable person would have done.
  • Determining the percentage of fault attributable to the claimant, which directly reduces the compensation awarded.
• Defendants often use contributory negligence as a defence, arguing the claimant failed to take reasonable care for their own safety.

Conclusion

Understanding these principles is essential for navigating personal injury claims, as they determine liability, potential defences, and the amount of compensation that may be awarded.

Case law

Stephens v Minister of Police

The case involved an 80-year-old man who fell from an unsecured landing at a police station. He had been directed by a police officer to wash his hands at a tap located outside. The plaintiff sustained injuries, including damage to his knee and facial lacerations. He claimed that the police officers failed to ensure the premises were safe for public use.

Bisschoff NO obo Reyners v PRASA

Reyners fell from a moving train operated by PRASA, resulting in severe head injuries. Subsequent surgical intervention led to traumatic brain damage, causing temporal lobe epilepsy, memory loss, aggression, personality changes, and a permanent loss of cognitive abilities and executive functioning.

Wessels v Pretorius

This case dealt with the negligence and personal liability of a father who had permitted his minor son to use his motor vehicle.