The Western Cape High Court recently remarked on the Road Accident Fund (RAF) litigation practices that has drastically reduced its reliance on external counsel. Instead, RAF “overburdened” a handful of attorneys at the State Attorney’s office according to the court.
We spoke with Raynold Tlhavani, Partner, and Micaela Pather, Senior Associate, at Webber Wentzel to get a better understanding of the challenges that this can present.
“We do not have exact figures and cannot comment on this accurately. Given the court’s comments on systemic delays and backlogs in Moss v RAF, we can estimate that the state attorneys are managing several hundred active files. This exceeds industry norms and is likely the reason for the delays, missed court deadlines and under-preparation,” Raynold and Micaela shares.
Overburdening the attorneys could lead to:
- Delays in processing and finalising claims.
- Delays in litigation, prolonging compensation for victims.
- Poor quality legal work due to time constraints, including inadequate preparation which increases the risk for adverse judgments against the RAF. Adverse judgments result in higher payouts against the RAF.
- Increased legal costs, due to inefficiencies.
- Erosion of public trust in the RAF and its ability to fulfil its mandate.
If you are in need of legal assistance, consider Webber Wentzel. The firm has deep expertise in insurance litigation, public interest law, and constitutional matters. They are well positioned to assist any organisation or medical aid scheme affected by RAF’s policies.
