The plaintiff sued the insurer under a motor vehicle policy. The policy provided cover for repairs, or the retail value of the vehicle if the cost of repair was 65% or more of the retail value.

Merits and quantum were not separated, so the plaintiff had to prove both liability and quantum at the same trial. The plaintiff alleged that the cost of repair would be around R329 000 and that the retail value of the vehicle was R330 000. Therefore, he claimed R328 000 (the retail value, minus the excess of R2000).

The insurer asked the court for absolution from the instance, because the values alleged by the insured were not proved.

The plaintiff called an expert to testify on the reasonable cost of repair. The insurer objected to this expert’s testimony because his assessment of the retail value came from one of the insurer’s expert reports. This expert report of the insurer was never introduced into evidence. That expert was not called to testify to confirm his report, and therefore the evidence was inadmissible. Further, the plaintiff’s expert assessment of repairs was given on the basis of 2023 figures, whereas the damage and replacement values should have been assessed in relation to 2020 values. The expert worked as a panelbeater and had no knowledge regarding engine damage and retail values.

The court accepted that the evidence introduced by the plaintiff was not competent to prove quantum, and therefore the court treated the claim as unproved and granted absolution from the instance.

Jacobs v King Price Insurance Co Ltd (A153/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1296 (28 November 2024)