Shaping the Law2019-07-25T09:31:01+00:00

SHAPING THE LAW

LindsayKeller represents clients in a range of legal matters, including important legal matters. Our extensive involvement in cases that are reported for setting legal precedent demonstrate how we contribute to shaping the legal landscape in our everyday work.

Engelbrecht v Road Accident Fund & Minister of Transport2019-07-21T19:24:39+00:00

2007 (5) BCLR 457 (CC), 2007 (6) SA 283 (SCA)

On behalf of the respondent.
Deals with the constitutionality of time bars and the interpretation of regulations or statutes.

Mahano and others v RAF and another2019-07-21T19:23:46+00:00

2015 (6) (SA) 237 (SCA)

This matter dealt with the interpretation of regulations issued under the Road Accident Fund Act and in particular whether it is possible to comply with regulation 3 in the absence of ministerial guidelines, if the regulations provided for guidelines to be issued by the minister.

Pithey v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:19:17+00:00

(319/13) (2014) ZASCA 55 (16 April 2014)

On behalf of the defendant.
Deals with the interpretation of Section 17 of the RAF Act and the difference between identified and unidentified claims.

Road Accident Fund v Myhill NO (Swalibe minors)2019-07-21T19:20:37+00:00

ZASCA 73 [2013]

On behalf of the appellant.
The matter deals with the requirements which would enable a minor, who was assisted by his/her guardian at the time, to set aside contracts that were concluded on his/her behalf.

RAF v Duma and three related cases2019-07-21T19:22:02+00:00

2013 1 All SA 543 SCA

On behalf of the appellant.
The interpretation of the Regulations promulgated under the Road Accident Fund Amendment Act and in particular the interpretation of the process dealing with non-pecuniary damages.

Paixão v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:26:09+00:00

2012 (6) SA 377 (SCA)

On behalf of the defendant.
Deals with permanent life partners, whether they are entitled to loss of support in the case of death without being formally married..

Road Accident Fund v Guedes2019-07-21T19:26:37+00:00

2006 (5) SA 583 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with contingency deductions on loss of income claims.

Road Accident Fund v Makwetlane2019-07-21T19:27:00+00:00

2005 (4) SA 51 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with the interpretation of regulations or statutes.

Road Accident Fund v Maphiri2019-07-21T19:27:30+00:00

2004 (2) SA 258 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with the effect of WCC payment on delictual damages when there is an apportionment of liability.

Road Accident Fund v Mongalo2019-07-21T19:28:03+00:00

2003 (3) SA 119 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with potential fraud and deeming provisions in Customary Unions in terms of section 32 of the (now repealed) Black Admin Act.

Road Accident Fund v Samela2019-07-21T19:28:27+00:00

2002 (1) SA 578 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Effect on damages if licensed taxi diverts from its route and causes an accident.

De Maayer v Serebro and Another; Serebro v Road Accident Fund and Another2019-07-21T19:28:54+00:00

2005 (5) SA 588 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with various issues, third-party joiners, multiple defendants, the role of reconstruction experts in determining negligence and negligence in a right-hand-turn scenario.

Standard General Insurance Co. Ltd and Another v Voest-Alpine Industrieanlangenbau Gmbh2019-07-21T19:29:17+00:00

1994 (3) SA 356 (A)

On behalf of the respondent.
The definitive matter that delineated the effect of co-insurers’ clauses and the obligations of co-insurers if the lead insurer pays.

Pithey v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:29:46+00:00

2012 JDR 1361 (GNP) [decision of full bench on appeal]

On behalf of the defendant.
Deals with the interpretation of Section 17 of the RAF Act and the difference between identified and unidentified claims.

Pithey v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:30:09+00:00

2009 JDR 1136 (GNP) [decision a quo]

On behalf of the defendant.
Deals with the interpretation of Section 17 of the RAF Act and the difference between identified and unidentified claims.

Megalane v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:30:16+00:00

2007 3 All SA 531 (W)

On behalf of the defendant.
Approach to be adopted in the calculation of quantum for loss of earning capacity and general damages.

Makwetlane v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:30:40+00:00

2003 (3) SA 439 (W)

On behalf of the defendant.
The court a quo’s decision, see SCA decision above.

Fulane v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:31:11+00:00

2003 (3) SA 461 (W)

On behalf of the defendant.
Deals with a review relating to taxation of costs where a separation of merits and quantum has been ordered, in particular which costs are recoverable after the first stage of proceedings.

Maphiri v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:31:29+00:00

2002 (6) SA 383 (W)

On behalf of the defendant.
The court a quo’s decision, see SCA decision above.

Polverini v General Accident Insurance Co. South Africa Ltd2019-07-21T19:31:37+00:00

1998 (3) SA 546 (W)

On behalf of the respondent.
Deals with the role of discharge forms in short-term insurance contracts.

Torres v Road Accident Fund2019-07-21T19:36:59+00:00

2010 (6A4) QOD 1 (GSJ)

On behalf of the defendant.
Very severe brain damage – quantification of damages.

Chartaprops 16 (Pty) Ltd and Another v Silberman2019-07-21T19:37:22+00:00

2009 (1) SA 265 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Setting out the liability, if any, of principals for the negligent acts of independent contractors.

Blesovsky NO and Others v Shipper and Another2019-07-21T19:38:07+00:00

2001 (4) SA 1269 (W)

On behalf of the respondent.
Deals with the interpretation of section 29 (1) of the Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984.

Baeck & Co SA (Pty) Ltd v Van Zummeren and Another2019-07-21T19:38:58+00:00

1999 (2) SA 110 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Whether the Court’s ratification of an act by the applicant applies retrospectively.

Rothman v Curr Vivier Incorporated and Another2019-07-21T19:39:25+00:00

1997 (4) SA 540 (C)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with compliance with a provision of section 8A (2) of the Share Block Control Act 59 of 1980.

LindsayKeller & Partners v AA Mutual Insurance Association Ltd and Another2019-07-21T19:40:04+00:00

1998 (2) SA 519 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with consistency between the Insurance Act 27 of 1943 and the Companies Act 61 of 1973.

Deutsche Babcock SA (Pty) Ltd v Babcock Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another2019-07-21T19:40:53+00:00

1995 (4) SA 1016 (T)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with the interpretation of the Companies Act 61 of 1973.

RAF v Duma and three related cases2019-07-21T19:41:19+00:00

2013 1 All SA 543 SCA

On behalf of the appellant.
The interpretation of the Regulations promulgated under the Road Accident Fund Amendment Act and in particular the interpretation of the process dealing with non-pecuniary damages.

South African Association of Personal Injury Lawyers v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development (Road Accident Fund, Intervening Party)2019-07-21T19:41:54+00:00

2013 (2) SA 583 (GSJ)

On behalf of the intervening party.
Deals with the legality of common law contingency fee agreements and the Contingency Fees Act.

De La Guerre v Ronald Bobroff & Partners Inc and two others2019-07-21T20:15:28+00:00

2013 JDR 0409 (GNP) [Full bench sitting as court of first instance]

On behalf of the third respondent.
Deals with the legality of common law contingency fee agreements and the Contingency Fees Act.

Paterson Exhibitions CC v Knights Advertising and Marketing CC2019-07-21T20:15:52+00:00

1991 (3) SA 523 (A)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with the validity of an offer of settlement.

Roux v Eskom2019-07-21T20:16:08+00:00

2002 (2) SA 199 (T)

On behalf of the defendant.
Deals with vicarious liability of employer for the delictual acts of employees.

Bezuidenhout N.O. v Eskom2019-07-21T20:16:35+00:00

2003 SA 83 (SCA)

On behalf of the respondent.
The definitive matter on vicarious liability and how it should be determined.

Precismeca Ltd v Melco Mining Supplies (Pty) Ltd2019-07-21T20:17:04+00:00

2003 (1) SA 664 (SCA)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with common law licensing agreements.

Mnandi Property Development CC v Beimore Development CC2019-07-21T20:17:09+00:00

1999 (4) SA 462 (W)

On behalf of the appellant.
Deals with rescission of a default judgment.

Hosch-Fordertechnik SA (Pty) Ltd v Brelko CC and Others2019-07-31T13:56:33+00:00

1990 (1) SA 393 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with application in terms of rule 24 (2) of the Uniform Rules of Court for leave to institute a claim in reconvention.

H R Holfeld (Africa) Ltd v Karl Walter & CO Gmbh and Another2019-07-21T20:17:34+00:00

(2) 1987 (4) SA 850 (W)

On behalf of the respondent.
Deals with security for costs.

H R Holfeld (Africa) Ltd v Karl Walter & CO Gmbh and Another2019-07-21T20:18:09+00:00

(2) 1987 (4) SA 861 (W)

On behalf of the first respondent.
Deals with discretion of a court to discharge a Rule Nisi.

Prok Afrika (Pty) Ltd and Another v NTH (Pty) Ltd and Others2019-07-21T20:18:41+00:00

1980 (3) SA 687 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with unfair competition, dishonest use of confidential information.

Hermes Versekeringsmaatskappy v Dartnell2019-07-21T20:18:59+00:00

1980 (4) SA 279 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with a court’s jurisdiction regarding an application by a peregrine.

Lewis v SD Turner Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others2019-07-21T20:20:07+00:00

1993 (3) SA 738 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Registration of a legal servitude.

Mekwa Nominees v Roberts2019-07-21T20:19:55+00:00

1985 (2) SA 498 (W)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with the interpretation of a clause in a sale of immovable property contract.

Deutsche Bank AG v Moser and Another2019-07-21T20:19:44+00:00

1999 (4) SA 216 (C)

On behalf of the applicant.
Deals with the effect of compulsory sequestration.

Elliot v Spheris, NO and Another2019-07-21T20:19:29+00:00

1977 (1) SA 190 (W)

On behalf of the respondent.
Effect of a clause prohibiting alienation of immovable property except testamentary position.

Pinn v Minister van Polisie2019-07-21T20:19:09+00:00

1977 (1) SA 899 (T)

On behalf of the applicant.
Interpretation of Rule 32 (5) of Magistrate’s Court Rules in Act 32 of 1944.

CONTACT US

For any enquiries, or to set up an appointment

CONTACT US