The onus to prove the defendant’s negligence is on the plaintiff

In Phillipus Arnoldus Du Plessis v. Road Accident Fund, the issue before the  Single Judge Bench in a matter of road accident was whether the defendant had his vehicle’s headlights on, and whether the plaintiff stopped at the intersection to look around for any approaching vehicle.

The facts leading to the above issues were that the plaintiff while driving his two-wheeler was struck by defendant’s vehicle as a result of which he suffered injuries. The plaintiff contended that, at the intersection he duly looked around for any approaching vehicle and only after being assured of no vehicle approaching, moved forward. It was argued before the Court that the defendant had not turned on the headlights, which the defendant claimed to be negative. The Court observed, that the onus was on the plaintiff, on a balance of probabilities, to show if the defendant was negligent and after perusing the plaintiff’s argument the Court conveyed the contrary opinion that it is equally probable that the plaintiff did not properly look around. The Court was of the view that the plaintiff failed to prove defendant’s negligence and made hence held that, the plaintiff himself was negligent. Accordingly, the claim was dismissed with costs.

Full News Link:-