Dramat v Scoin Trading (PTY) LTD (NCT/87734/2017/75(1)(b)) [2018] ZANCT 95 (16 July 2018)

Dramat v Scoin Trading (PTY) LTD (NCT/87734/2017/75(1)(b)) [2018] ZANCT 95 (16 July 2018)

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's purchase was an investment rather than an ordinary consumer transaction. Both parties' submissions indicated that the coins were acquired for speculative purposes, with the expectation of resale after three years. The Consumer Protection Act does not regulate investment purchases, and the National Consumer Commission correctly determined that the matter fell outside its jurisdiction. Consequently, the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the Applicant. The Tribunal declined to grant leave to refer the matter for a hearing and directed that the Applicant may collect her coins or arrange for their dispatch in accordance with the...

Citation
[2018] ZANCT 95
Parties
Applicant: Farieda Dramat; Respondent: Scoin Trading (PTY) LTD
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 July 2018
Case Number
NCT/87734/2017/75(1)(b)
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Refer Complaint Directly to Tribunal Under Section 75(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act
Outcome
Application for leave to refer the matter directly to the Tribunal is refused for lack of jurisdiction.
Judges
B.C. Dumisa
Legal Topics
Consumer Protection Act, Investment Contracts, Jurisdiction of Tribunal
Commercial and Corporate Consumer Protection Act Investment Contracts Jurisdiction of Tribunal

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

Farieda Dramat

Applicant

Scoin Trading (PTY) LTD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Refer Complaint Directly to Tribunal Under Section 75(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear a dispute regarding an investment purchase under the Consumer Protection Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant is entitled to a refund for coins purchased as an investment.
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant was misled by the Respondent regarding buy-back guarantees.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's purchase was an investment rather than an ordinary consumer transaction. Both parties' submissions indicated that the coins were acquired for speculative purposes, with the expectation of resale after three years. The Consumer Protection Act does not regulate investment purchases, and the National Consumer Commission correctly determined that the matter fell outside its jurisdiction. Consequently, the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the Applicant. The Tribunal declined to grant leave to refer the matter for a hearing and directed that the Applicant may collect her coins or arrange for their dispatch in accordance with the...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to refer the matter directly to the Tribunal is refused for lack of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • The Applicant's application for leave to refer the matter directly to the Tribunal for a hearing is not granted.
  • The Applicant may either collect her coins from the Respondent or arrange for their dispatch in terms of Clause 7 of the storage contract signed on 26 September 2012.