Driver sues, wins pothole case

E

ekkesa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2154717,00.html

Driver sues, wins pothole case
27/07/2007 14:45 - (SA)

Johannesburg - An Eastern Cape motorist has won a claim against Buffalo City municipality for damages caused by a pothole, Dispatch Online reported on Friday.

Eddie Opperman, 53, took his fight for compensation to the East London Small Claims Court this week.

The court ordered the municipality to pay him R2 100.

Opperman said he was driving his car along Union Avenue in East London in October last year when he hit a pothole.

A tyre was damaged and the rim buckled.

"It was dark and I couldn't swerve because there was a car in the lane next to me," Opperman told the Dispatch on Thursday.

He said he was unable to drive any further, and workers from a nearby petrol station helped him change the damaged tyre.

The total cost for a new tyre, the repair of the rim and the subsequent court summons was R2 100.

Buffalo City had no representative in court because of "a mix-up with the times", said engineering services director Shaun Peard.

However, the municipality intended fighting back.

"We will be appealing because this will have repercussions," Peard said.
Click to expand...
 
Finally....

I think as motorist we SHOULD be able to claim back from the municipality for not maintaining the road networks properly....
 
"We will be appealing because this will have repercussions," Peard said.

lolll....:rolleyes: i can only imagine!
 
The claims are gonna roll in..... :D except I dont think there are any admin people to handle it....
 
awesome... glad to see people taking action...

Hopefully some high profile lawyer will help him in the appeal

(Didn't know you could appeal a small claims court ruling?)
 
I actually am not sure you can.... and at the same time I don't think it sets a legal precedent either....
 
well, you can do this in the UK. So I think its a natural progression that we see decisions like this here. Its the Municipality's duty to care for the road. As for setting precedents, it would only hold persuasive value for small claims courts in the same jurisdiction (at least I think it would). Only the High Courts (and above) set precedents that have to be followed by their respective divisions.
 
Well done Eddie!

I had to laugh when I saw this was in East London. When I lived there, East London was often referred to as Pothole city. Seems like things haven't changed.
 
Moederloos said:
My feelings too - anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...

2 sources say you cannot appeal a decision from a small claims court commissioner. However it says that it can be taken on review

Source 1: http://www.paralegaladvice.org.za/docs/chap03/03.html#summary

The Commissioner's decision or judgment cannot be taken on appeal.

The Commissioner's judgment can be taken on review in the High Court on three grounds:

* If the court did not have jurisdiction. In other words the case should not have been heard in that court.
* If the Commissioner was biased or corrupt.
* If the proper procedure was not followed in the Court. This is also called a gross irregularity. For example, if the Commissioner did not allow one of the sides to tell their story, this is not proper procedure, because each side must get a fair hearing.
Click to expand...

Source 2: http://www.legal-aid.co.za/services/c_small.php
The commissioner’s decision is final and there is no appeal to a higher court.
Click to expand...
 
Wish I had done this two years ago. I also hit a blerry pothole and had to replace the tire and wheel.
 
If the proper procedure was not followed in the Court. This is also called a gross irregularity. For example, if the Commissioner did not allow one of the sides to tell their story, this is not proper procedure, because each side must get a fair hearing.
Click to expand...

Does this extend to them mixing up their date and times ? They will surely try to use this to bring it under review

My feeling - they were afforded the opportunity to present their side and failed to do so, so the ruling must hold.

Any ruling only holds persuasive power, as each case has it's own merits

Now to find a pothole :D
 
ToxicBunny said:
Finally....

I think as motorist we SHOULD be able to claim back from the municipality for not maintaining the road networks properly....
Click to expand...
Yep, I'm really tired of the JRA and its failure to fix road defects :mad:.
Buffalo City had no representative in court because of "a mix-up with the times", said engineering services director Shaun Peard.

However, the municipality intended fighting back.

"We will be appealing because this will have repercussions," Peard said.
Click to expand...
It seems them Buffaloz in the City are a bit like the Grim Poisonous Ivyness Creep - incompetent, overfed, lazy and living the high life on tax payers' money...:rolleyes:

I wish Buffalo City officials a good cattle prodding up the rear in their attempts to appeal this ruling.
 
In this case if the decision is appealed, and lost again. Does it not then become a legal precedent? So in fact it might be better for this municipality to just pay up, or really face the music?
 
The R2100 will come from the ratepayers anyway, if more claims come in, they'll increase the rates and people will be subsidising those expensive 4x4 tires which damage so easily.
 
and at the same time I don't think it sets a legal precedent either....
Click to expand...

It's not the first time someone sued... In the '80's we knew a guy who sued the Roodepoort Municipality for exactly the same thing, and won!
 
Oh goody.. Got a claim against Tswane municipality i got to put in as well for a similar case
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X