55:
infliction of the injury. Where the direct cause is some antecedent or ancillary act, then it could not normally be said that the death or injury was "caused by" the driving, but it might be found to "arise out of" the driving. Whether this would be found would depend upon the particular facts of the case and whether, "applying ordinary, common-sense standards," it could be said that the causal connection between the death or injury and the driving was sufficiently real and close to enable the court to say that the death or injury did in fact arise out of the driving. The word "driving," as used in relation to the insured motor vehicle, means "ordinarily the urging on, directing the course and general control of the vehicle while in motion and all other acts reasonably or necessarily incidental thereto."
46:
protruded into its path, causing it to crash into another motorcar, and thus to injure the plaintiff and his wife. To a summons and declaration claiming damages from the insurer of the tram, the insurer of third defendant's car (the second defendant) and the third defendant, the second defendant had excepted on the ground that the plaintiffs' injuries had neither been "caused by" nor "arisen out of" the third defendant's driving of the car within the meaning of section 11 (1) of the Motor
Vehicle Insurance Act.
36:
The case involved an exception to a declaration, and turned on the question of the meaning and effect of section 11(1) of the Motor
Vehicle Insurance Act, in particular the meaning of the word "Driving" (regard being had to section 1(3). The court determined that, when the driver of a car opens its
54:
In order to give a wider application than the phrase "caused by" to the phrase "arising out of" (and thereby to prevent it from becoming redundant), Corbett J held that it must be regarded, as it appeared in section 11 (1) of the Act, as covering cases where the driving is an indirect cause of the
32:
is an important case in the South
African law of delict. It was heard in the Cape Provincial Division by Corbett J on March 15, 1965, with judgment handed down on April 7. The attorneys of the excipient (or second defendant), who was represented in court by DL Kooy, SC (with him DO Delahunt), were
45:
After the third defendant had manoeuvred his car into a parking bay, switched off his engine and applied the hand-brake, he had reached behind him to remove an article from the back seat, and then opened the door preparatory to alighting. At this moment, a trackless tram struck the door, which
58:
Corbett J held, as against the second defendant, that the plaintiffs' injuries had not been caused by, nor had they arisen out of, the driving of the insured vehicle; accordingly, the exception was upheld with costs.
162:
142:
213:
324:
229:
237:
221:
181:
125:
205:
314:
33:
Reilly, Reilly & Tucker. The respondent's attorneys were
Sonnenberg, Hoffman & Galombik, and he was represented by S. Aaron.
117:
149:
137:
197:
189:
73:
17:
169:
319:
251:
157:
130:
174:
37:
door after parking it, he has not perpetrated an act "caused by nor arising out of" the driving of the car.
68:
99:
308:
95:
78:
214:
Pretoria City
Council v Auto Protection Insurance Co. Ltd.
222:
R v
Standard Tea and Coffee Co. (Pty.) Ltd. and Another
29:
Wells and
Another v Shield Insurance Co Ltd and Others
18:
Wells and
Another v Shield Insurance Co Ltd and Others
182:
Oosthuizen v London and
Lancashire Insurance Co. Ltd.
230:
Wellworths
Bazaars Ltd v Chandler's Ltd. and Another
238:
Workmen's Compensation Commissioner v SANTAM Beperk
126:Barkett v SA Mutual Trust & Assurance Co. Ltd.
206:Pillai and Another v New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
118:Atlantic Coast Line Railway Company v Daniels
8:
150:Jacobs v Auto Protection Insurance Co. Ltd.
138:Hulett v Commissioner for Inland Revenue
264:
198:Philander v Alliance Assurance Co. Ltd.
7:
190:Petersen v SANTAM Insurance Co. Ltd.
25:
170:Minister of Pensions v Chennell
1:
325:South African delict case law
252:Motor Vehicle Insurance Act
158:Leemhuis and Sons v Havenga
74:South African law of delict
341:
315:1965 in South African law
121:(1911) 8 Ga. App. 775.
225:1951 (4) SA 412 (AD).
153:1964 (1) SA 690 (W)).
271:1965 (2) SA 865 (C).
241:1949 (4) SA 732 (C).
233:1947 (2) SA 37 (AD).
217:1963 (3) SA 136 (T).
201:1963 (1) SA 561 (C).
193:1961 (1) SA 205 (C).
185:1956 (2) SA 319 (C).
104:Causation in the Law
209:1961 (2) SA 70 (N).
69:South African law
16:(Redirected from
332:
320:1965 in case law
299:
296:
290:
287:
281:
278:
272:
269:
21:
340:
339:
335:
334:
333:
331:
330:
329:
305:
304:
303:
302:
297:
293:
288:
284:
280:Act 29 of 1942.
279:
275:
270:
266:
261:
248:
113:
92:
87:
65:
52:
43:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
338:
336:
328:
327:
322:
317:
307:
306:
301:
300:
291:
282:
273:
263:
262:
260:
257:
256:
255:
247:
244:
243:
242:
234:
226:
218:
210:
202:
194:
186:
178:
166:
154:
146:
134:
122:
112:
109:
108:
107:
91:
88:
86:
83:
82:
81:
76:
71:
64:
61:
51:
48:
42:
39:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
337:
326:
323:
321:
318:
316:
313:
312:
310:
295:
292:
286:
283:
277:
274:
268:
265:
258:
253:
250:
249:
245:
240:
239:
235:
232:
231:
227:
224:
223:
219:
216:
215:
211:
208:
207:
203:
200:
199:
195:
192:
191:
187:
184:
183:
179:
176:
172:
171:
167:
164:
160:
159:
155:
152:
151:
147:
144:
140:
139:
135:
132:
128:
127:
123:
120:
119:
115:
114:
110:
105:
101:
97:
96:H. L. A. Hart
94:
93:
89:
84:
80:
77:
75:
72:
70:
67:
66:
62:
60:
56:
49:
47:
40:
38:
34:
31:
30:
19:
294:
285:
276:
267:
236:
228:
220:
212:
204:
196:
188:
180:
168:
156:
148:
136:
124:
116:
103:
57:
53:
44:
35:
28:
27:
26:
254:29 of 1942.
100:Tony Honoré
309:Categories
85:References
173:(1946) 2
133:353 (AD).
129:1951 (2)
79:Insurance
246:Statutes
63:See also
50:Judgment
175:All ER
298:870H.
289:870E.
259:Notes
161:1938
141:1944
111:Cases
90:Books
41:Facts
177:719.
165:524.
145:263.
98:and
163:TPD
143:NPD
311::
131:SA
102:,
106:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.