Spier wine estate gardner wins another major battle against Prasa

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) found that Masibulele Rautini would not have been hurt if the carriage doors were closed while the train was moving.

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) found that Masibulele Rautini would not have been hurt if the carriage doors were closed while the train was moving.

Published Nov 10, 2021

Share

CAPE TOWN - A decade-long litigation over whether a man jumped or was pushed from a moving train in Stellenbosch has once again found the Passenger Rail Agency of SA (Prasa) to have been in the wrong.

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) found that in essence, Masibulele Rautini would not have been hurt if the carriage doors were closed while the train was moving.

The matter started in November 2011 when Rautini, a gardener at Spier Wine Estate, was allegedly thrown out of a moving train between Du Toit and Lynedoch train stations during a scuffle after three men threatened passengers with a knife and a gun, demanding their cell phones.

As a single witness Rautini said he had boarded the train at Du Toit station and had planned to walk back to work as the Spier station was used for private events, and trains never stopped there.

Rautini’s evidence was that the doors of the train were open when it left Du Toit station, and remained open throughout the journey.

Several flaws during the court case were highlighted by the SCA including that Rautini was never cross-examined on what he had told the medical personnel at the Stellenbosch, Tygerberg and Paarl hospitals where he had been admitted.

Prasa argued that when Rautini was in the witness box, he knew exactly what evidence was already placed before the court, and that he had every opportunity “to deny the challenge, to call corroborative evidence, to qualify the evidence given by the witness or others and to explain contradictions on which reliance is to be placed’’.

The SCA found that argument to have no merit, and if Prasa had wanted to suggest that Rautini’s version that he was pushed was in fact a fabrication, that it should have explored that with Rautini.

“It is common cause between the parties that the carriage doors were open throughout the journey since it was an established fact that the appellant fell from the train through the open doors of the carriage.

“In essence, the appellant would not have suffered injuries in the manner he did if the carriage doors were closed while the train was in motion,” the SCA found.

Prasa spokesperson Andiswa Makanda said they were studying the judgment.

“The Prasa notes the judgment handed down by the Supreme Court of Appeal in the matter of Rautini v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa. Prasa and its legal team is currently studying the judgment in order to determine the appropriate way forward,” she said.

Cape Times