Roy Barendse and Marzia Gertse
Whether and to what extent the existence of insurance will influence a judge when deciding to impose civil liability on a defendant, remains unsettled in South African law. In foreign jurisdictions, such as America, the existence or absence of insurance is considered a major factor in the imposition of liability. To illustrate the status of insurance as a factor in imposing civil liability in South Africa, we consider the role of insurance in the interpretation of exemption clauses. More specifically, we examine the case of Durban’s Water Wonderland Ltd v Botha & Another 1999 (1) SA 982 (SCA) in this regard.