 Gerike acknowledged that technically, under the Prescription Act, her claim had prescribed, but argued that in fact it had not, in terms of section 12(3), because she had only discovered the identity of motorboat driver some time later.The court disagreed, finding on the evidence that, instead of leaving everything to her husband, and thereby paying a purely passive role in the identification, she could herself have asked the one question required to establish Sacks's identity.She had not exercised ‘reasonable care’, in other words.