Tentamen (uitwerkingen)
PVL3703 Exam 2024| Due 11 October 2024
- Vak
- Instelling
Exam of 15 pages for the course PVL3703 at Unisa (PVL3703 Exam 2024)
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 2 van de 15 pagina's
Voorbeeld 2 van de 15 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
Verkoper
Volgen
Thandolowethu
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
PVL3703 EXAM 2024Read the fictitious scenarios below and answer the questions that follows. QUESTION 1
Brian, a school bus driver, is involved in an accident on his way back from transporting students to
their respective schools. His school bus swerved into the oncoming lane and collided with Thabo’s
car. As a result of this accident, Brian sustained serious head injuries and became unconscious,
while Thabo’s car was left badly damaged. Brian was subsequently hospitalised and eventually
regained consciousness. However, he has no recollection of how the accident occurred. During
the treatment for his head injuries, the medical practitioners determined that Brian suffered an
epileptic fit (a seizure) at the time of the accident.
1.1 Discuss with reference to relevant authority whether Brian indeed “acted” for the
purposes of the law of delict. Restrict the scope of your answer to what is asked in the
question and note in particular that the question deals with the element of conduct.
In the law of delict, the element of conduct refers to a voluntary human act or omission. For liability
to arise in a delictual claim, there must be an action that is voluntary. Voluntary conduct means that
the person must be able to control their muscular movements by means of their will. If a person's
actions are not voluntary due to some external or internal factor, they have not "acted" for the
purposes of delict. This is often referred to as the defence of automatism.
Automatism and Voluntary Conduct
Automatism occurs when a person's conduct is involuntary due to factors such as an epileptic fit,
blackout, or unconsciousness. If the person was in such a state, their bodily movements are not
controlled by their conscious will, and therefore, they have not acted in the legal sense required for
delictual liability. The defence of automatism is recognized in cases where a defendant argues that,
although harm was caused by their actions, they did not act voluntarily, as they were in a state of
automatism.
In Molefe v Molefe, the court held that the plaintiff bears the onus of proving that the defendant
acted voluntarily. If a person suffers an epileptic fit or another condition rendering them incapable
, of controlling their actions, such as a blackout or fainting, their actions are not considered
voluntary. In this case, Brian suffered an epileptic fit while driving, which led to the accident. Given
that his epileptic fit would have rendered him incapable of controlling his actions, he could argue
that his actions were involuntary due to automatism.
Application to Brian's Case
Brian was driving the school bus when he suffered an epileptic fit, which caused the bus to swerve
into Thabo’s car. Since Brian had no control over his actions during the fit, his conduct was
involuntary at that moment. As such, the action of swerving into the oncoming lane would not be
considered a voluntary act for the purposes of the law of delict.
In the case of Victor, the court found that a driver who caused an accident during an epileptic fit
could still be found liable if it was shown that they were aware of their condition and the potential
risk. However, this relates to negligence, not the element of conduct. In Brian’s case, the focus is
solely on whether he “acted” for the purposes of delict. Since Brian’s epileptic fit deprived him of
the ability to control his actions, his conduct would likely not be classified as voluntary.
For the purposes of the law of delict, Brian did not “act” because his actions during the epileptic fit
were not voluntary. Therefore, under the element of conduct, Brian could raise the defence of
automatism, arguing that he did not have the necessary control over his actions when the accident
occurred.
Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:
Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews
Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!
In een paar klikken geregeld
Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.
Focus op de essentie
Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper Thandolowethu. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor $4.53. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 65040 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen
Laatst bekeken door jou
Samenvatting ·
Samenvatting - Bloed 2 (2007GENGE1)
Samenvatting ·
Volledige samenvatting WOA h1-7
Samenvatting ·
Biologie vakinhoud II.1: De huid
Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·
CST PART 1 ELA Already Graded A+
Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·
BIO 181 Unit 5 well answered graded A+
Voordeelbundel ·
Understanding pathophysiology
Samenvatting ·
internationaal betalingsverkeer
Samenvatting ·
Alle examenvragen investeringsanalyse
