The Department of Transport has labeled as inaccurate media reports on the recent Constitutional Court ruling in the matter of the Road Accident Fund (RAF) and the Minister of Transport versus Vusumuzi Mdeyide.
Mdeyide lodged a claim on 8 March 2002 for damages after sustaining injuries in an accident on 8 March 1999 - three years and three days after the accident happened.
The department said certain media continued to incorrectly report that the Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional on 30 September 2010 section 23(1) of the RAF Act, which limits the time period in which a claim can be lodged to three years.
It said these reports seemed to refer to the minority judgment (with three judges) as the authoritative judgment.
The department said the majority judgment is, however, the effective judgment of the court and the overwhelming majority of the judges (eight judges) ruled in favour of the RAF and the Minister of Transport.
The court upheld the three year prescription period in the RAF Act. The prescription periods contained in the RAF Act consequently applied to all RAF claims.
It was found that the three year limit contained in the RAF Act, during which the claim in question had to be lodged, was reasonable, justifiable and afforded the claimant an adequate opportunity to seek redress in the courts and was therefore constitutional.
The department welcomed the judgment of the Constitutional Court.
