In February 2026, the High Court in Mthatha awarded damages for two vehicles during the cerebral palsy child’s remaining lifetime and applied a 20% contingency deduction when calculating a child’s loss of earning capacity arising from negligent perinatal care at public facilities in the Eastern Cape.
The Defendant was found liable on the merits and the parties subsequently settled general damages and architectural costs. The court was asked to determine the child’s transport costs and her loss of earning capacity. On mobility, the occupational therapists agreed that an MPV is the most suitable transport option, but left costing and configuration to a mobility expert. Relying on the mobility expert’s evidence, the court accepted that starting with a smaller, cost-efficient vehicle and later replacing it with a larger MPV with hoist and restraint was justified over the child’s remaining 17.5-year life expectancy, given rural road conditions, wear-and-tear, and safety considerations
On earning capacity, both industrial psychologists agreed the child would have finished school but differed on qualification level, career path, and earnings data sources. The court preferred the plaintiff expert’s evidence, which used conservative Paterson gradings, recognised slow economic growth and unemployment, and factored in learnerships and skills development legislation, over the defence expert’s approach, which mixed datasets without clear justification and relied on unspecified research.
Given the child’s young age and labour-market uncertainty, the court applied a 20% contingency deduction to the loss of earning capacity, higher than the 15% the parties suggested, in line with authority emphasising greater vicissitudes for younger claimants
The court reaffirmed that judges must evaluate competing expert opinions by examining the internal logic of the opinions and whether the inferences drawn rest on admitted or proven facts, rather than on demeanour. Courts should not accept expert views uncritically but must analyse their essential reasoning against the probabilities.
Issues relating to caregiving, case management, stimulation centre costs, and the public healthcare defence were postponed for later determination.