Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd v Summit Financial Partners (Pty) Ltd and Others (314/2020) [2021] ZASCA 91; 2022 (1) SA 377 (SCA) (25 June 2021)

Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd v Summit Financial Partners (Pty) Ltd and Others (314/2020) [2021] ZASCA 91; 2022 (1) SA 377 (SCA) (25 June 2021)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the National Credit Act does not provide for an appeal against a Tribunal's ruling granting leave to refer a complaint directly to it under section 141(1)(b). The Act envisages an expeditious, informal, and cost-effective complaints procedure, and the Tribunal's grant of leave...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] ZASCA 91
Parties
Appellant: Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Summit Financial Partners (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: National Consumer Tribunal; Respondent: National Credit Regulator
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 June 2021
Case Number
314/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Ponnan, Wallis, Mocumie, Dlodlo, Eksteen
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Leave to Refer, Appealability, Prohibited Practices, Costs Orders
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure National Credit Act Leave to Refer Appealability Prohibited Practices Costs Orders

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Summit Financial Partners (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

National Consumer Tribunal

Respondent

National Credit Regulator

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a decision of the National Consumer Tribunal to permit a direct referral in terms of section 141(1)(b) of the National Credit Act is appealable under section 148(2).
  2. 2 What test should the Tribunal apply in assessing an application for leave to refer a complaint directly to it.
  3. 3 Whether Summit Financial Partners satisfied the test for leave to refer.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the National Credit Act does not provide for an appeal against a Tribunal's ruling granting leave to refer a complaint directly to it under section 141(1)(b). The Act envisages an expeditious, informal, and cost-effective complaints procedure, and the Tribunal's grant of leave is not a 'decision' susceptible to appeal under section 148(2). The Tribunal has a wide discretion and is not bound by a rigid test when considering such applications. The appeal was dismissed, and the merits of the underlying complaint were not considered.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.