Prasa to pay man who lost his legs

File photo: Motlabana Monnakgotla

File photo: Motlabana Monnakgotla

Published Aug 25, 2015

Share

Durban - Initially exonerated from liability, the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa will now have to compensate a man who lost both legs when a train went over them. The compensation will be 50% of his proven costs.

Mui Albert Mokethi took the agency to court after his accident at the Thornwood Railway Station, in Pinetown, on November 26, 2011 – and lost.

He then appealed against the decision and Judge Anton van Zyl, concurring with judges Shyam Gyanda and Thoba Poyo Dlwati, ruled in his favour this month.

Mokethi tried to board a train but ended up under the wheels. Mokethi said the train started moving as he was trying to get on board and he lost his balance. His legs were severed above the knee.

Judge Van Zyl said what was in dispute was whether the agency, through the actions of its employees, had been negligent. The agency denied negligence but in the alternative pleaded that Mokethi had also been negligent and claimed apportionment in accordance with the Apportionment of Damages Act.

At the end of the initial trial, it was found that Mokethi had failed to persuade the court that his version was the correct one.

The judge could not find that when the train started to move, one or more of its doors remained open, and held that no negligence had been established on the part of the agency’s employees.

Judge Van Zyl said Mokethi had testified that on his arrival at the station, the train was stationary with its doors open.

He said he exhibited his ticket and walked across the platform. He said the train pulled off just as he was in the process of boarding.

According to his testimony, he had one foot inside the train when its unexpected movement threw him off balance. He lost his footing and was carried along with the moving train to where he came to rest beyond the end of the platform.

“The difficulty I have with the plaintiff’s version of events is that in order to catch the plaintiff so unawares and carry him such a relatively long distance from a standing start, the train must have commenced its movement and accelerated at such a pace that I have difficulty in visualising such an event.

“Objectively, it would appear improbable. It is also not without significance that, while the plaintiff denied that he was running at any stage, he explained that from the time he entered the station until he attempted to board the train, he never stopped but instead kept moving. This would suggest that he had no time to waste.”

Judge Van Zyl said in his view the overall probabilities suggested that Mokethi’s attempt at boarding the train was made at an open coach door.

The Mercury

Related Topics: