Kwazulu-Natal Consumer Protector and Another v Mystic Cars (Pty) Ltd (KZNCT11/2023) [2023] ZACONAF 7 (2 August 2023)
The Tribunal found that the Defendant engaged in prohibited conduct by selling a vehicle with unresolved mechanical defects and failing to comply with MIOSA's recommendations. The parties reached a settlement in which the Defendant acknowledged liability and undertook to refund the Consumer R20,000.00 by 3 August 2023. Mr Floyd Evan Willis was confirmed as surety and co-principal debtor for the payment. In the event of breach, the full repair cost of R37,051.85 would become immediately payable. The Tribunal confirmed the settlement agreement as an order, granting the Consumer enforceable rights to claim the agreed amounts and interest in case of non-payment.
- Citation
- [2023] ZACONAF 7
- Parties
- Applicant: Kwazulu-Natal Consumer Protector; Applicant: Carol Ann Botes; Respondent: Mystic Cars (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- Consumer Affairs Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 2 August 2023
- Case Number
- KZNCT11/2023
- Procedural Posture
- Settlement Order / Order Granted Following Settlement Agreement
- Outcome
- Settlement agreement confirmed as an order of the Tribunal. Defendant to pay R20,000.00 to the Consumer by 3 August 2023; Mr Floyd Evan Willis confirmed as surety and co-principal debtor. In case of breach, R37,051.85 becomes immediately payable.
- Judges
- B Dumisa, A Sewpersad, P Dabideen
- Legal Topics
- Consumer Protection Act, Prohibited Conduct, Settlement Agreement, Refund, Suretyship
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kwazulu-Natal Consumer Protector
Applicant
Carol Ann Botes
Applicant
Mystic Cars (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Settlement Order / Order Granted Following Settlement Agreement
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Defendant engaged in prohibited conduct under the Consumer Protection Act.
- 2 Whether the Defendant is liable to refund the Consumer for mechanical defects in the purchased vehicle.
- 3 Whether the settlement agreement should be made an order of the Tribunal.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the Defendant engaged in prohibited conduct by selling a vehicle with unresolved mechanical defects and failing to comply with MIOSA's recommendations. The parties reached a settlement in which the Defendant acknowledged liability and undertook to refund the Consumer R20,000.00 by 3 August 2023. Mr Floyd Evan Willis was confirmed as surety and co-principal debtor for the payment. In the event of breach, the full repair cost of R37,051.85 would become immediately payable. The Tribunal confirmed the settlement agreement as an order, granting the Consumer enforceable rights to claim the agreed amounts and interest in case of non-payment.
Court Disposition
Settlement agreement confirmed as an order of the Tribunal. Defendant to pay R20,000.00 to the Consumer by 3 August 2023; Mr Floyd Evan Willis confirmed as surety and co-principal debtor. In case of breach, R37,051.85 becomes immediately payable.
Orders
- The settlement agreement between the parties is made an order of the KwaZulu-Natal Consumer Tribunal.
- The Defendant shall pay R20,000.00 to the Second Plaintiff by 3 August 2023.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment