Capitec Bank Ltd v Alexanderson and Others (NCT/155298/2020/165(1)) [2020] ZANCT 22 (29 October 2020)

Capitec Bank Ltd v Alexanderson and Others (NCT/155298/2020/165(1)) [2020] ZANCT 22 (29 October 2020)

The Tribunal found that the Applicant had filed a notice of intention to oppose prior to the granting of the debt review order, but this notice was not considered by the Tribunal panel member when the order was made. The debt counsellor was aware of the Applicant's opposition and should have withdrawn the application. The failure to consider the Applicant's opposition constituted an error in law, rendering the order erroneously granted in terms of section 165 of the National Credit Act. As a result, the Tribunal was satisfied that the requirements for rescission were met and granted the application to rescind the order dated 22 May 2019 as it related to Capitec Bank Ltd and the specified...

Citation
[2020] ZANCT 22
Parties
Applicant: Capitec Bank Ltd; Respondent: Sebastien Alarik Alexanderson; Respondent: Pulane Perpetua Motubatse; Respondent: Home Choice (Pty) Ltd
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 October 2020
Case Number
NCT/155298/2020/165(1)
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Default Hearing; Application for Rescission of Tribunal Order
Outcome
Application for rescission granted; previous order rescinded as it relates to Capitec Bank Ltd.
Judges
K Moodaliyar, J Simpson, P Beck
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Rescission of Order, Debt Review, Default Judgment
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Rescission of Order Debt Review Default Judgment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Capitec Bank Ltd

Applicant

Sebastien Alarik Alexanderson

Respondent

Pulane Perpetua Motubatse

Respondent

Home Choice (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Default Hearing; Application for Rescission of Tribunal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal order dated 22 May 2019 should be rescinded in terms of section 165 of the National Credit Act.
  2. 2 Whether the order was erroneously granted in the absence of the Applicant's opposition.
  3. 3 Whether the debt counsellor's application was valid given the Applicant's termination and opposition.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Applicant had filed a notice of intention to oppose prior to the granting of the debt review order, but this notice was not considered by the Tribunal panel member when the order was made. The debt counsellor was aware of the Applicant's opposition and should have withdrawn the application. The failure to consider the Applicant's opposition constituted an error in law, rendering the order erroneously granted in terms of section 165 of the National Credit Act. As a result, the Tribunal was satisfied that the requirements for rescission were met and granted the application to rescind the order dated 22 May 2019 as it related to Capitec Bank Ltd and the specified...

Court Disposition

Application for rescission granted; previous order rescinded as it relates to Capitec Bank Ltd.

Orders

  • The application to rescind the order is granted. The order made on 22 May 2019 under case number NCT/129371/2019/138(1) is hereby rescinded.
  • There is no order as to costs.