Assumptions reasonable drivers may make
In Martindale v Wolfraardt 1940 AD 235 it was held that:
“… a driver is entitled to regulate the manner of his driving on the assumption that another driver will not suddenly, without warning and recklessly, expose himself and others to danger.”
Specific assumptions
Apart from the general assumptions a driver may make, the Court recognises that the driver is entitled to make assumptions in regard to various specific rules and various situations.
The rule of the road
Because the observance of the rule of the road; which requires traffic to keep to the left of the centre of the road, is of such importance, a motorist keeping to his side of the road is entitled to assume that approaching traffic will do likewise. Even when an approaching vehicle is on its incorrect side of the road a driver on his correct side may assume that the former will return timeously to its correct side of the road. This assumption does not entitle a driver on the correct side of the road to remain passive in the face of threatening danger; as soon as the danger of a collision becomes evident, he is under a duty to take all reasonable steps to avert one.
(Solomon v Musset & Bright 1926 AD 427)
Privileged vehicles right of way
The driver of a privileged vehicle exercising his right of way is entitled to make much higher assumptions as to what other drivers will do than the ordinary driver may (the Road Traffic Act sect. 84(3) and 86(2)
Uncontrolled intersections/junctions
The driver who reaches an uncontrolled intersection and observes another motor car approaching along the cross road at a normal speed at an apparently safe distance is entitled to assume:
“… that the driver of the other car is keeping a proper lookout and has seen him, also that if he proceeds to cross the intersection in front of the other car the motorist will take steps to avoid a collision …”
(Pullen v Pieterse 1954 (2) SA 195 (T)
A driver travelling along a main road is entitled to assume that traffic approaching from a minor cross road will not enter the uncontrolled intersection unless it is safe to do so, but this assumption does not confer on him an absolute right of way. He is not thereby relieved of the duty to keep a general lookout and of travelling at a reasonable speed.
(Robinson Bros v Henderson 1928 AD 138)
Stop streets
A driver in a through street is entitled to assume that the driver approaching along a stop street will stop his vehicle at the stop sign, however a through street driver does not enjoy an absolute right of precedence and is not relieved of the duty of keeping a general lookout.
Robot/controlled intersections
A driver entering an intersection shortly after the green signal turns in his favour should make allowance for the possibility of other traffic which has not yet cleared the intersection moving across his line of travel; but thereafter he is entitled to assume that traffic facing the red signal will not enter the intersection until it receives the green signal. Accordingly a driver entering shortly after a robot turns amber is entitled to assume, in the absence of any indications to the contrary, that the traffic facing the red signal will not enter the intersection until it receives the green signal.
AA Onderlinge Ass. v Mantje 1980 (1) SA 655 (A)
Makoena v Rondalia 1979 (3) SA 15 (A)
Overtaking
There is no general rule governing the assumptions of a driver intending to overtaking a vehicle proceeding in the same direction ahead of him, but:
- Passing motorists are entitled to assume that the slower traffic being overtaken will continue on its course on the left of the road, and the hooter should only be used to warn such a driver if he manifests an intention to stray from a proper course.
- Unless some emergency, making it necessary to give a specific warning, arises, the overtaking car should remain mute
(Beswick v Crews 1965 (2) SA 690 (A)
Turning
The roads are for the common use of all vehicles to enable persons to get to their destinations in every direction:
… “ but where there are two streams of traffic in a road in opposite directions, a person in a vehicle proceeding in one direction is entitled to assume that those who are travelling in the opposite direction will continue in their course and that they will not suddenly and inopportunely turn across their lane of traffic”.
A person travelling in one direction can assume that one travelling in the opposite direction will continue his course, but he may only assume that until he is shown a clear intention to the contrary. When a clear and undoubted warning is given, then there is no longer any room for the assumption that the other person will continue in his former course.
(Milton v Vacuum Oil Co 1932 AD 197)
There is judicial conflict on the assumptions that a driver who is about to execute a right hand turn is entitled to make vis-a-vis following traffic.
In spite of the assumptions a driver may legitimately have made “as soon as it would be evident to a reasonable man that there is a danger of an accident arising from inability, refusal or neglect of the wrongdoer to give way, then the rightful user of the road is bound to take all reasonable steps to avoid an accident”.
(Wessels v Johannesburg Municipality 1971 (1) SA 479 (A)