Mia Boddenberg
19792107
Tutor – Abbey MacFarlane
In the case of Pinchin and Another v Santam Insurance Co Ltd 1963 (2) SA 254 (W), the application of the nasciturus adage is questioned in the form of whether the child has an action to recover damages for pre-natal injuries. Judge Heimstra believes that in terms of the rule of Roman law, this can be applied and the child has an action to recover damages for the pre-natal injuries.
The background to this case shows that the mother was experiencing a normal pregnancy and at 6 months into her pregnancy, on the 28th of November 1959, was involved in a motor accident. The consequences of this accident were that the mother lost significant amniotic fluid, which had however stopped leaking once she reached the hospital. The doctors were unsure if the fluid was amniotic fluid and if it was a result of a tear in the uterus as it sealed up quickly. The doctors observed no harm to the fetus post-accident. Two weeks before delivery the fetus appeared quiet but had a healthy heartbeat and was assumed to be fine. Upon delivery, the baby weighed five pounds and eleven ounces and the placenta appeared small according to Dr. Gerald Marks, a general practitioner. Shortly after birth, the baby was put in an oxygen tent due to the baby turning slightly blue. Only when the child was four months old was it confirmed to have cerebral palsy.
…show more content…
The term “delict” according to Duhaime’s Law Dictionary states that it is: “A civil law term which imposes liability on a person who causes injury to another, or for injury caused by a person or thing under his