The ruling requires insurers to plead subrogation and join as parties in civil actions, departing from long-standing practice that allows insurers to step into their insured’s shoes without separate citation.
A regulatory expert believes the judgment misinterpreted key legal principles in its ruling on the RAF’s obligation to reimburse medical schemes.
The High Court says Discovery Health misconstrued the scope of the judgment that set aside the RAF’s first directive on the payment of medical scheme members’ claims.
The Road Accident Fund’s directive is not in line with the Medical Schemes Act, the regulator says.
