Pretoria - A wheel rim and tyre that had been lying in the emergency lane on the N1 Western Bypass during peak-hour traffic will cost the Road Accident Fund (RAF) dearly.
The driver of a Harley-Davidson motorcycle hit the objects and died.
The man is only identified by his initials in the South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg judgment, as his wife and his two children are claiming loss of support from the RAF.
For the wife and children to succeed in their claim, they had to prove that the death of the man – the breadwinner – was due to the negligence or another unlawful act of the driver of an insured vehicle or its owner.
The identity of the person who discarded the wheel and rim in the emergency lane, is unknown.
But in ordering that the RAF was 100% liable to compensate the widow and her children, the court said the most plausible inference is that the object emanated from the driving of a motor vehicle.
The unknown driver/owners were negligent in that they failed to maintain their vehicle and allowed it to be driven on the freeway when the wheel and axle became detached from it, the court said.
An witness testified that on the morning of July 17, 2015, he was driving to work on the N1 Western Bypass during peak-hour traffic, which he described as bumper-to-bumper traffic.
When he was close to the Malibongwe off-ramp he noticed a motorcycle approaching from behind in the emergency lane. He testified that the motorcycle was “on the other side of the yellow line”.
When he looked to the front again, he noticed a tyre in the emergency lane. The motorcycle collided with the tyre and it flipped over.
According to the witness there was not enough space for the victim to pass the tyre and it was a major hazard. There were also no warning signs to alert other motorists of the hazard.
The court said it was clear that the driver of a vehicle had abandoned the wheel and axle assembly of that vehicle in the emergency lane. It is also evident that they failed to remove the object, left it unattended and failed to place any warning signs alerting other motorists using the emergency lane of the danger it imposed.
“Had it not been for the insured driver/owner’s said negligence the collision and death would not have occurred,” Acting Judge AM van der Merwe said.
He noted that the reason the victim was travelling in the emergency lane was not known. “Generally the emergency lane is resorted to by motorists in situations of emergency. It is however not uncommon to see motorists on South African roads using the emergency lane when travelling in peak hour traffic or for motorists to drive into the emergency lane making way for faster traffic to pass.”
The judge added that one would expect a reasonable driver/owner to remove the object from the emergency lane if it came from his vehicle and caused a hazard. One would also expect that he would place warning signs at a distance from the object to alert other road users of the emergency lane of the hazard ahead.
The judge said the fact that the deceased might have been negligent in travelling in the emergency lane and that he might have had the “last opportunity” to avoid colliding with the object would not exonerate the RAF from liability in this instance.
“Based on the evidence it cannot be said that the deceased was solely to blame for the collision,” the judge said.
Pretoria News