Pretoria – Judge Ramarumo Monama of the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, is facing an unlikely opponent – an 84-year-old North West widow who wants him to pay for allegedly failing to act on her Road Accident Fund (RAF) claim nearly 28 years ago.
But the judge, in defending the action, submitted a number of defences in which he stated that he was not liable for her damages.
The gogo, who lives in Makgobistad village near Mahikeng, is suing the judge of about R1.2million, arguing he did not act on her instructions to claim damages on her behalf against the RAF when he was a lawyer many years ago.
Koketso Frieda Moreotlotlo allegedly suffered injuries in a bus accident in the late 80s.
Walking with the aid of a frame, the frail gogo was ready to take the stand in court on Friday, but the matter was postponed for technical reasons.
It will be back on the court roll in a few months’ time.
Moreotlotlo stated in court papers that on August 5,1989, she and other passengers were on their way to a political rally.
The bus had been hired to transport members of the community to the rally held by then Bophuthatswana president, Lucas Mangope.
The bus driver allegedly lost control and was involved in an accident during which Moreotlotlo was injured. She said she suffered head and chest injuries, and her ear was also partially ripped from her head.
She was taken to hospital, where she remained for several weeks.
It is stated that she approached Judge Monama who at that time was an attorney practising in the area, to handle her claim against the RAF.
Monama undertook to do all things necessary to lodge her claim timeously, and secure compensation on her behalf.
He allegedly maintained that he was an expert in the recovery of damages following motor vehicle accidents, and the woman said she therefore trusted his representations.
“The defendant had in fact informed the plaintiff (the woman) that he did prosecute her claim in time,” it was stated in the court papers.
He advised her from time to time that he was unable to recover any damages as the RAF was in serious financial difficulty and unable to make payment to her,” it was stated in the court document.
It also said that he told her that he would come back to her as to when the RAF would be able to discharge her claim.
“The plaintiff became disillusioned during 2009 and subsequently instructed another lawyer to establish from the defendant the status of her claim."
“It is stated that the defendant told her new lawyer that the claim was never prosecuted.”
According to the court papers, the judge breached his undertaking to her to follow her instructions by instituting a claim on her behalf, and to see to it that the period for her claim did not lapse.
She is now claiming the damages directly from him as she blames him for not acting within the legal time frame.
This resulted in her claim lapsing as it fell outside of the three-year window given in which to institute a claim, she argued.
The judge submitted a number of defences, which include that Moreotlotlo did have a valid claim against the RAF but, according to him, she only approached him after August 2002, when her claim period had already lapsed.
He also objected to her claim on the basis that she did not mention details in her summons regarding the name of the bus driver.
She also failed to set out the exact date on which she had first consulted him about the accident, he said.
The judge denied all the victim's allegations that he had not acted * her best interests.