R5.4 million compensation for arm amputee after train attack

A man who had to have his arm amputated after suffering extensive injuries when he was thrown from a train, will be compensated to the tune of R5.4 million by the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) for medical expenses and loss of earnings.

The man was attacked on a train on August 26, 2017, at Koeberg station. His assailants pushed him through the open doors of the train.

The foreign national underwent an above-elbow amputation of the left arm and sustained soft tissue injury to the lumbar spine.

The man, who holds a matric-equivalent qualification from the Democratic Republic of Congo, was gainfully employed as a Code 14 driver at the time of the incident and has since been unable to work. He now assists his spouse as an informal trader selling fresh produce from a temporary stall at their home.

Two industrial psychologists gave expert witness and submitted that he was unable to resume his work role as a truck driver or similar, or any other work roles in line with his level of education and job skills in the open labour market at the time of the incident.

Two orthopaedic surgeons, who also gave expert testimony during proceedings, agreed that the man is limited to doing activities needing one arm. He cannot return to work as a truck driver, but could be trained to do alternative clerical or supervisory work, should the opportunity arise.

However, they further noted that the amputee’s chances of securing gainful employment in the open labour market are almost non-existent, and that he will probably remain unemployed for the remainder of his working life.

Since the incident occurred, the man has worn a cosmetic prosthesis irregularly due to discomfort because of its weight.

Judge Melanie Holderness, in her judgment, said a contested matter was which prosthesis is most appropriate for the plaintiff.

“The orthopaedic surgeons and OTs (occupational therapists) deferred to the orthotists and prosthetists on which prosthetic would ultimately be best used and provide the greatest benefit to the plaintiff.”

The two prosthetists appointed by the plaintiff and the defendant agreed that he is a medically suited candidate for both the myo-electronic (ME) prosthesis and a cosmetic prosthesis.

The man, who has adapted to daily living with his stump, submitted to the court that his current needs are for a lightweight cosmetic prosthesis with a silicone cosmetic finish. He said it would be fair to cater for two cosmetic prostheses replaced every 10 years, since he will only use them on certain occasions and not full-time.

The man added that his greatest challenge in public is vulnerability, and that he does not want to look like an easy target.

Cape Times