Supreme Court of Appeal Rules Road Accident Fund Must Pay All Victims

Background

The Road Accident Fund (RAF) provides compensation to people injured in road crashes in South Africa. For years, the fund required foreign nationals to show proof of legal residency before they could receive a payout. This rule sparked debate about whether undocumented immigrants should be excluded from the scheme.

Gauteng High Court’s Initial Decision

In Pretoria, the Gauteng High Court examined a directive that asked foreign claimants to prove they were legally in the country at the time of the accident. The court rejected that requirement.

Key points from the judgment

• Justice Norman Davis said accidents do not discriminate based on race, gender, age, or immigration status.
• The judge found nothing in the RAF Act that allows the fund to limit compensation to only documented residents.
• He warned that neither the transport minister nor the RAF can change the law by political decision or a new interpretation.

RAF’s Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal

The fund appealed, arguing that:

• Undocumented foreigners should not be covered because the scheme aims to prevent fraud.
• Linking claims to legal residency helps avoid conflicts with immigration law.

The RAF claimed its policy was a reasonable way to ensure that only genuine accident victims receive money.

Supreme Court of Appeal’s Ruling

A three‑judge panel dismissed the RAF’s appeal, ordering the fund to pay costs.

Main reasons for the decision

1. The RAF Act uses the phrase “every person” or “any person,” which the court interpreted to include all individuals present in South Africa, regardless of their immigration status.
2. There is no provision in the law that allows the fund to exclude victims based on whether they are documented or not.
3. The court emphasized that allowing the RAF to impose extra requirements would exceed its legal authority.

Why the Decision Matters

This ruling clarifies that the RAF’s compensation scheme is meant to be inclusive. It protects vulnerable road users who might otherwise be left without support after a crash. The decision also reinforces the principle that administrative bodies cannot rewrite statutes through policy alone.

What This Means for Victims

For undocumented foreigners

They can now file a claim with the RAF without needing to show a visa or permit. The fund must assess the claim based on the accident and injuries, not on immigration paperwork.

For all road users

The judgment sends a message that the RAF’s safety net is available to anyone hurt on South African roads, promoting fairness and quicker access to aid after a traumatic event.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Appeal has affirmed that the Road Accident Fund must compensate every person injured in a road accident, including those without legal residency documents. By upholding the inclusive language of the RAF Act, the court ensures that the fund’s purpose—to provide relief to accident victims—remains unconditional and accessible to all who need it.