Comment
Author: Admin | 2025-04-28
By application ofthe res ipsa loquitor rule;[72.3] whether breaches of the relevant health and safety statutes andregulations constitute grounds forthe imposition of strictliability;[72.4] whether the principle of joint and several liability should apply tomultiple mining companies incases where they employed the samemineworker, though at different times, but all exposing him toexcessive levels of silica dustwhile he was in their respectiveemploy; [72.5] whether or not the filing of the application for certificationinterrupts prescription; [72.6] whether the breach of one or more of the constitutional rightscaptured in sections 9(4), 10, 11,12(1)(c), 12(2) and 24 of theConstitution automatically gives cause for a delictual action; and,[72.7] whether compensatory damages are available to mineworkers undersections 12(1)(c) and/or 24 of theConstitution[73] Theselegal questions are general and applicable to the case of each andevery mineworker, and their determination will have a finalanddeterminative effect on the claim of each of them.Theclaims of dependants[74] Asis the case with the mineworkers, at this stage the dependantapplicants are unable to provide the court with a precise numberofdependants that will join in the action, save to say that the numberis realistically expected to be in the tens of thousands.Thesedependants would have to establish the same five elements of thedelict as the mineworkers, and they intend to rely on thesameevidence as that on which the mineworkers rely to prove some of thoseelements. Issuesconcerning Pulmonary Tuberculosis[75] Themineworkers contend that there is a correlation between the exposureto high levels of silica dust and the development of TB.The questionof whether the dust control measures, or whether
Add Comment