Lotlhare and Another v Kruger NO (2568/2015) [2018] ZANCHC 85 (16 November 2018)

Lotlhare and Another v Kruger NO (2568/2015) [2018] ZANCHC 85 (16 November 2018)

The application for reconsideration or amendment of the final order fails because the order was granted after proper notice to the applicants and not in their absence, rendering Rule 6(12)(c) inapplicable. The applicants have not demonstrated that the repayment process under sections 83 and 84 of the Banks Act has been completed, as distribution to claimants, payment of interest, and identification of all investors remain outstanding. The retention of assets by the repayment administrator is justified by the Act until the process is finalised. The applicants have not provided sufficient evidence to establish the exact amount obtained from unlawful activities or that all obligations have...

Citation
[2018] ZANCHC 85
Parties
Applicant: Lotlhare, Pule Ezechiel; Applicant: Lotlhare, Lerato; Applicant: Reatswelela Traders CC; Respondent: Kruger NO, Johannes George
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 November 2018
Case Number
2568/2015
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Reconsideration and Declaratory Relief Following Final Order
Outcome
Application dismissed. No order as to costs.
Judges
Olivier ADJP
Legal Topics
Repayment Administrator, Unlawful Banking Activities, Asset Attachment, Court Order Reconsideration, Interest on Unlawful Deposits
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure Repayment Administrator Unlawful Banking Activities Asset Attachment Court Order Reconsideration Interest on Unlawful Deposits

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lotlhare, Pule Ezechiel

Applicant

Lotlhare, Lerato

Applicant

Reatswelela Traders CC

Applicant

Kruger NO, Johannes George

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Reconsideration and Declaratory Relief Following Final Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to reconsideration or amendment of the final court order authorising the respondent to retain possession of their assets.
  2. 2 Whether the repayment process under sections 83 and 84 of the Banks Act has been completed, entitling the applicants to the return of their assets.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have complied fully with the repayment direction, including payment of interest and costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for reconsideration or amendment of the final order fails because the order was granted after proper notice to the applicants and not in their absence, rendering Rule 6(12)(c) inapplicable. The applicants have not demonstrated that the repayment process under sections 83 and 84 of the Banks Act has been completed, as distribution to claimants, payment of interest, and identification of all investors remain outstanding. The retention of assets by the repayment administrator is justified by the Act until the process is finalised. The applicants have not provided sufficient evidence to establish the exact amount obtained from unlawful activities or that all obligations have...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.