Daisy on Call (Pty) Ltd v Codeswop (Pty) Ltd (NCT/302216/2023/75(1)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 58 (26 November 2024)

Daisy on Call (Pty) Ltd v Codeswop (Pty) Ltd (NCT/302216/2023/75(1)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 58 (26 November 2024)

The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to deliver the web and mobile-based application for inspection and approval before demanding payment, in breach of section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act. The agreement stipulated that deposits were not to be treated as payment until the final product was delivered and approved. The respondent's conduct in issuing a final invoice and withholding deposits without delivering the goods contravened sections 19(2), 19(5), 65, and 51 of the CPA. The Tribunal held that the applicant was entitled to treat the goods as unsolicited and receive a full refund of deposits paid. The respondent's argument that the contract was for services was rejected,...

Citation
[2024] ZANCT 58
Parties
Applicant: Daisy On Call (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Codeswop (Pty) Ltd
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 November 2024
Case Number
NCT/302216/2023/75(1)(b)
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application granted. The respondent's conduct is declared prohibited under the CPA. The respondent is ordered to refund the applicant the purchase price within ten days.
Judges
MC Peenze, Z Ntuli, CJ Ntsoane
Legal Topics
Consumer Protection Act, Special Order Agreement, Refund of Deposit, Prohibited Conduct, Contractual Breach
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Consumer Protection Act Special Order Agreement Refund of Deposit Prohibited Conduct Contractual Breach

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daisy On Call (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Codeswop (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the respondent contravene section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act by failing to deliver goods for inspection before demanding payment?
  2. 2 Is the applicant entitled to a refund of deposits paid under the agreement?
  3. 3 Did the respondent's conduct constitute prohibited conduct under the CPA, including contraventions of sections 51 and 65?

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the respondent failed to deliver the web and mobile-based application for inspection and approval before demanding payment, in breach of section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act. The agreement stipulated that deposits were not to be treated as payment until the final product was delivered and approved. The respondent's conduct in issuing a final invoice and withholding deposits without delivering the goods contravened sections 19(2), 19(5), 65, and 51 of the CPA. The Tribunal held that the applicant was entitled to treat the goods as unsolicited and receive a full refund of deposits paid. The respondent's argument that the contract was for services was rejected,...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The respondent's conduct is declared prohibited under the CPA. The respondent is ordered to refund the applicant the purchase price within ten days.

Orders

  • The respondent has contravened sections 19(2) and 19(5), read with section 20(2)(b), section 65, and sections 51(1)(b)(i)-(ii) and 51(1)(h) of the CPA.
  • The respondent's contravention is declared prohibited conduct.