In a recent judgment, which the Court itself referred to the Constitutional Court, the East London High Court held that Section 23(1) of the Road Accident Fund Act is inconsistent with the Constitution. This is the 3 year time period and the facts in this case are special - with the claimant being blind, just for starters. The Fund initially offered to pay his claim, even though lodged late, if he were to prove he was blind. That offer was not however carried through. The case, which the Constitutional Court will hear shortly is Vusumzi Mdeyide vs Road Accident Fund.
The Judge in his summary says that Section 23(1) is inconsistent with the Constitution "in so far as it does not make provision for the knowledge of the debtor and of the facts from which the debt arises, infringes upon the the rights of the plaintiff of access to Courts....."