Joubert v Absa Bank Ltd (NCT/10685/2013/128(1)NCA) [2014] ZANCT 41 (25 September 2014)

Joubert v Absa Bank Ltd (NCT/10685/2013/128(1)NCA) [2014] ZANCT 41 (25 September 2014)

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not comply with the procedural requirement under section 128(1) of the National Credit Act, as there was no evidence that the applicant had disputed the sale price or delay with the respondent after the vehicle was attached. The Tribunal held that this requirement is a necessary precursor to its jurisdiction to review the sale under section 128(2). Furthermore, the evidence presented regarding the vehicle's value was speculative and insufficient to support the applicant's claim. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the application for review of the sale.

Citation
[2014] ZANCT 41
Parties
Applicant: Carmen Deidre Joubert; Respondent: Absa Bank Limited
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 September 2014
Case Number
NCT/10685/2013/128(1)NCA
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Hearing on Merits; Respondent in Default
Outcome
Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
J Simpson, H Devraj, P Beck
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Debt Review, Sale in Execution, Review of Credit Provider Action
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Debt Review Sale in Execution Review of Credit Provider Action

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carmen Deidre Joubert

Applicant

Absa Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Hearing on Merits; Respondent in Default

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the applicant comply with the requirement under section 128(1) of the National Credit Act to attempt to resolve the disputed sale with the credit provider before approaching the Tribunal?
  2. 2 Was the sale of the applicant's vehicle conducted for the best price reasonably obtainable and as soon as reasonably possible, as required by law?

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not comply with the procedural requirement under section 128(1) of the National Credit Act, as there was no evidence that the applicant had disputed the sale price or delay with the respondent after the vehicle was attached. The Tribunal held that this requirement is a necessary precursor to its jurisdiction to review the sale under section 128(2). Furthermore, the evidence presented regarding the vehicle's value was speculative and insufficient to support the applicant's claim. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the application for review of the sale.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application to the Tribunal to review the sale of the vehicle is dismissed.
  • No order is made as to costs.