Davids and Another v Absa Bank Limited and Others (NCT/67822/2016/165(1)(P)NCA) [2017] ZANCT 52 (4 January 2017)

Davids and Another v Absa Bank Limited and Others (NCT/67822/2016/165(1)(P)NCA) [2017] ZANCT 52 (4 January 2017)

The Tribunal found that the applicants and respondents were properly notified of the hearing date, time, and venue. In accordance with Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Regulations, the presiding member was satisfied that the requirements for notification were met. As neither the applicants nor any respondents appeared or were represented at the hearing, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to dismiss the application for variation of the debt re-arrangement order. The dismissal was formalized on record, and the applicants were informed of their right to refile the application.

Citation
[2017] ZANCT 52
Parties
Applicant: Carel Barend Jacobus Davids; Applicant: Heather Cecelia Davids; Respondent: Absa Bank Ltd; Respondent: African Bank Limited; Respondent: Direct Axis (SA) Pty Ltd; Respondent: Finchoice (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Foschini Retail Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: MFC a division of Nedbank Limited; Respondent: Nedbank Limited; Respondent: RCS Loan; Respondent: SA Home Loans (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Sanlam Personal Loans (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Standard Bank of South Africa Limited; Respondent: Toyota Financial Services (SA) Limited
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 January 2017
Case Number
NCT/67822/2016/165(1)(P)NCA
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Variation of Debt Re Arrangement Order; Hearing Dismissed for Non Appearance
Outcome
Application dismissed for non-appearance; applicants may refile.
Judges
H Devraj, F Manamela, P Beck
Legal Topics
Debt Rearrangement, Nonappearance, Dismissal for Nonappearance, National Credit Act, Variation of Order
Civil Procedure Debt Rearrangement Nonappearance Dismissal for Nonappearance National Credit Act Variation of Order

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carel Barend Jacobus Davids

Applicant

Heather Cecelia Davids

Applicant

Absa Bank Ltd

Respondent

African Bank Limited

Respondent

Direct Axis (SA) Pty Ltd

Respondent

Finchoice (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Foschini Retail Group (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

MFC a division of Nedbank Limited

Respondent

Nedbank Limited

Respondent

RCS Loan

Respondent

SA Home Loans (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Sanlam Personal Loans (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited

Respondent

Toyota Financial Services (SA) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Variation of Debt Re Arrangement Order; Hearing Dismissed for Non Appearance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to vary the debt re-arrangement order should be considered in the absence of the parties.
  2. 2 Whether the parties were properly notified of the hearing date, time, and venue.
  3. 3 Whether the application should be dismissed for non-appearance.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicants and respondents were properly notified of the hearing date, time, and venue. In accordance with Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Regulations, the presiding member was satisfied that the requirements for notification were met. As neither the applicants nor any respondents appeared or were represented at the hearing, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to dismiss the application for variation of the debt re-arrangement order. The dismissal was formalized on record, and the applicants were informed of their right to refile the application.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for non-appearance; applicants may refile.

Orders

  • The application lodged in terms of Section 165 of the National Credit Act is dismissed.
  • The applicants may refile the application.