De Rebus Monani Article
When a dependant is compensated for the loss of support by a breadwinner, does the dependant receive:
• The support that would have been received had the accident not occurred, or
• The support he or she would have received had the death not occurred?
The Difference in Calculation
The difference between these scenarios is significant. For example, if one child is killed in the same accident as the breadwinner, the calculation of support changes:
• If the accident had not occurred: The breadwinner was supporting the whole family, including the child who died. The calculation reduces the shares of surviving dependants to account for support for the deceased child.
• If the death had not occurred: The calculation excludes the deceased child, treating it as if the child had died separately from the accident. The surviving dependants receive higher shares as the deceased child’s share is excluded.
Legal Precedent: The Monani Principle
In the case of Road Accident Fund v Monani and Another 2009 (4) SA 327 (SCA), the ruling was that the calculation must ignore the parts consumed by the deceased child, as if the death of the breadwinner had not occurred.
Complex Scenarios
Both Parents Dying in the Same Accident
If both parents die in the same accident and both were earning an income, questions arise:
• Could the Monani Principle apply?
• Does the ruling in Santam Insurance Co Ltd v Fourie 1997 (1) SA 611 (A) apply, where the joint income is pooled, or are the children’s losses calculated separately for each parent?
Example Scenarios
1. Mother with No Income: Similar to the Monani case, the deceased mother would be excluded from the calculation, as she would not have required future support.
2. Mother Earning Income but Not Enough to Support Herself
Including the Mother in the Calculation:
• Based on the Santam case, the joint income of the family is considered, with each breadwinner’s income first used to meet their share, and the remainder supporting the children.
Excluding the Mother from the Calculation:
• Applying the Monani Principle, the father’s income alone is considered. The children claim a higher level of support since the father’s income is no longer partially supporting the mother.
3. Mother Earning Less than the Father but Supporting Herself and Partially the Children
Including the Mother in the Calculation:
• Each parent supports themselves and the children. The children’s claim is the sum of the support from both parents.
Excluding the Mother from the Calculation:
• The father’s income alone supports the children. The support from the mother falls away, reducing the overall support received by the children.
The Principle Explained
The typical way of compensating a dependant is to receive the same support they would have received had the accident not occurred. However, if certain family members die in the accident, the remaining dependants may receive increased support. The Monani case supports excluding the deceased child to benefit the remaining dependants.
Conclusion
Depending on the parents’ income, the Monani Principle could apply if both parents were killed. The losses of the children are not calculated separately for each parent but are based on realistic scenarios considering the family’s actual circumstances before and after the accident.
Author Bio
Ivan Kramer FAASA, FIA, BSc (Wits) is a consulting actuary in Johannesburg. Note: The writer is not an attorney, and some arguments are based on general reasoning rather than specific legal principles.
Published in De Rebus - November 2013