PVL3703
ASSIGNMENT 1 (SEMESTER 1)
DUE DATE: March 2025
Written Assignment Submission Guidelines:
Please ensure that your assignment is submitted electronically through the myUnisa platform no
later than March 2025. Kindly note that fax or email submissions will not be accepted.
NB: Assignment submitted to the lecturer(s) through email will not be considered.
QUESTION 1
In this case, Zanele wishes to institute a delictual action against Lethabo, who caused injury to her
while driving a forklift during a seizure. Let's focus on the element of conduct in the context of
delictual liability.
Conduct in the Law of Delict
Conduct refers to an action or omission that leads to harm or damage to another person. In the
context of delict, conduct is a central element because it is the foundation for establishing liability.
For Lethabo to be held liable, his conduct must be assessed based on whether he acted unlawfully,
and whether there was fault (negligence, recklessness, or intent) in his actions.
1. Lethabo's Act of Driving the Forklift
Lethabo’s conduct involved him driving a forklift, which is an action that typically requires a level of
skill and attention, especially in a workplace. Forklifts are heavy machinery, and driving them safely
is paramount to prevent accidents or injury. The fact that Lethabo was operating the forklift while
, suffering from an epileptic fit constitutes an act of negligence, especially since he failed to take the
prescribed medication that morning.
2. Lethabo’s Failure to Take Medication
Lethabo’s failure to take his prescribed medication, which directly led to the onset of his epileptic
fit, can be viewed as a failure to act in a reasonable manner. If Lethabo was aware of his medical
condition and the consequences of not taking his medication, he had a duty to ensure that he took
the medication before engaging in potentially dangerous activities, such as operating machinery.
His decision not to take the medication can be seen as an omission, and omissions that result in
harm are considered a form of wrongful conduct in delict law.
3. Causation and Consequence
Lethabo’s failure to take the medication and subsequent seizure led to him losing control of the
forklift, causing injury to Zanele. There is clear causation between Lethabo’s conduct (driving the
forklift while having a seizure) and the injury suffered by Zanele. Therefore, his conduct directly
resulted in the harm, satisfying the element of conduct under delict law.
Relevant Authority: Case Law
The element of conduct in delict is often discussed in relation to negligence and omissions. In the
case of Kruger v Coetzee, the court held that for conduct to be negligent, a person must fail to act
as a reasonable person would in similar circumstances. Lethabo’s failure to take his medication,
despite knowing the risks associated with his medical condition, would likely be seen as a failure to
meet the standard of care expected in these circumstances.
Similarly, in Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security, the court emphasized that a person must
take reasonable steps to avoid harm to others. Lethabo's failure to take his medication before
driving a forklift may be seen as an omission that disregards his duty of care to Zanele and others in
the workplace.
ASSIGNMENT 1 (SEMESTER 1)
DUE DATE: March 2025
Written Assignment Submission Guidelines:
Please ensure that your assignment is submitted electronically through the myUnisa platform no
later than March 2025. Kindly note that fax or email submissions will not be accepted.
NB: Assignment submitted to the lecturer(s) through email will not be considered.
QUESTION 1
In this case, Zanele wishes to institute a delictual action against Lethabo, who caused injury to her
while driving a forklift during a seizure. Let's focus on the element of conduct in the context of
delictual liability.
Conduct in the Law of Delict
Conduct refers to an action or omission that leads to harm or damage to another person. In the
context of delict, conduct is a central element because it is the foundation for establishing liability.
For Lethabo to be held liable, his conduct must be assessed based on whether he acted unlawfully,
and whether there was fault (negligence, recklessness, or intent) in his actions.
1. Lethabo's Act of Driving the Forklift
Lethabo’s conduct involved him driving a forklift, which is an action that typically requires a level of
skill and attention, especially in a workplace. Forklifts are heavy machinery, and driving them safely
is paramount to prevent accidents or injury. The fact that Lethabo was operating the forklift while
, suffering from an epileptic fit constitutes an act of negligence, especially since he failed to take the
prescribed medication that morning.
2. Lethabo’s Failure to Take Medication
Lethabo’s failure to take his prescribed medication, which directly led to the onset of his epileptic
fit, can be viewed as a failure to act in a reasonable manner. If Lethabo was aware of his medical
condition and the consequences of not taking his medication, he had a duty to ensure that he took
the medication before engaging in potentially dangerous activities, such as operating machinery.
His decision not to take the medication can be seen as an omission, and omissions that result in
harm are considered a form of wrongful conduct in delict law.
3. Causation and Consequence
Lethabo’s failure to take the medication and subsequent seizure led to him losing control of the
forklift, causing injury to Zanele. There is clear causation between Lethabo’s conduct (driving the
forklift while having a seizure) and the injury suffered by Zanele. Therefore, his conduct directly
resulted in the harm, satisfying the element of conduct under delict law.
Relevant Authority: Case Law
The element of conduct in delict is often discussed in relation to negligence and omissions. In the
case of Kruger v Coetzee, the court held that for conduct to be negligent, a person must fail to act
as a reasonable person would in similar circumstances. Lethabo’s failure to take his medication,
despite knowing the risks associated with his medical condition, would likely be seen as a failure to
meet the standard of care expected in these circumstances.
Similarly, in Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security, the court emphasized that a person must
take reasonable steps to avoid harm to others. Lethabo's failure to take his medication before
driving a forklift may be seen as an omission that disregards his duty of care to Zanele and others in
the workplace.
