A pensioner has won a legal battle to hold the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) liable for injuries sustained during a robbery on a Metrorail train en route to Retreat Station, the Cape Times has reported.

The Western Cape High Court found Prasa liable for the proven or agreed damages suffered by 72-year-old Jacob Barnett, who was struck in the face by a brick during the incident.

“I am satisfied that the plaintiff has proven his case and that it was the defendant’s failure to safeguard the plaintiff whilst he was a passenger on the train that ultimately resulted in the injuries he sustained,” the court ruled. “I am unable to find that the plaintiff could have done anything to prevent the attack. He was an innocent passenger.”

Barnett is seeking R100,000 for past and future medical expenses and R500,000 in general damages. The quantum of damages will be determined at a later court date.

According to Barnett’s testimony, he and his wife boarded the Metrorail train at Cape Town Station. Their ordeal began when the train stopped at Hazeldene Station, where three unidentified men and a woman entered the carriage. As the journey continued, the group attempted to rob the couple. One of the assailants produced a knife, and a struggle ensued, during which Barnett sustained a hand injury. The attackers then grabbed his wife’s handbag and fled at Crawford Station.

“As the train pulled into Crawford Station, the three males exited the train, and the plaintiff, out of fear and panic, also ran out onto the platform to find a security officer or someone in authority to assist. He said he believed someone in charge was present — identified as a man with a whistle,” the judgment read.

The court further noted that the perpetrators were attacked by bystanders on the platform after news of the robbery spread. Barnett later recovered his wife’s handbag, which he found in another section of the train, apparently dropped by the robbers while fleeing.

Before the train departed Crawford Station, a woman on the platform hurled a brick into the open doors, striking Barnett on the nasal bone. He suffered immediate pain and severe bleeding.

Barnett argued that Prasa had breached its duty of care by failing to provide adequate — or any — security on board. He cited the absence of security personnel, ticket inspections, surveillance cameras and panic buttons as contributing factors to the traumatic event.

As a result of the incident, Barnett sustained multiple injuries, including soft tissue swelling, a head injury, and severe emotional trauma. He required hospital treatment and experienced significant pain and discomfort.

Prasa’s defence amounted to a bare denial, according to court documents.

“(Prasa) called no witnesses, and this is indicative of the fact that there is no one to testify to the version pleaded by the defendant. This was consistent with its plea being a bare denial, as realistically, the defendant had not a single shred of evidence to challenge the plaintiff’s allegations,” the court found.

“If the defendant had installed cameras, it may have had some evidence. If guards had been present, there might have been a report. But all of this was glaringly absent.”

The court concluded that Prasa had failed to demonstrate that it had taken any measures to ensure passenger safety, thereby exposing commuters to harm.

Prasa did not respond to requests for comment by the publication deadline.

IOL

Source link