Louw v Carter and Other (1890/2021) [2024] ZAECQBHC 21 (19 March 2024)

Louw v Carter and Other (1890/2021) [2024] ZAECQBHC 21 (19 March 2024)

The court found that the applicant did not exhaust internal remedies before instituting judicial review proceedings, as required by PAJA and the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act. The applicant failed to provide credible evidence of submitting an application for leave to appeal and did not make any follow-up inquiries over a period of four years. The review application was brought well outside the 180-day period prescribed by PAJA, and the applicant did not establish exceptional circumstances to justify exemption from exhausting internal remedies. The court held that the applicant's explanations for delay were improbable and that the dispute regarding the alleged appeal...

Citation
[2024] ZAECQBHC 21
Parties
Applicant: Paul Louis Louw; Respondent: Alexander Frederick Carter; Respondent: Ombud for Financial Services Providers; Respondent: Johannes Theodorus Otto; Respondent: Denton Dean Henning; Respondent: Paul R Johnson
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2024
Case Number
1890/2021
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Application to Review and Set Aside Administrative Determination
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
G Beshe
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Failure to Exhaust Internal Remedies, Unreasonable Delay, Financial Services Regulation, Writ of Execution, Judicial Review
Administrative Law Banking and Finance Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Failure to Exhaust Internal Remedies Unreasonable Delay Financial Services Regulation Writ of Execution +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Louis Louw

Applicant

Alexander Frederick Carter

Respondent

Ombud for Financial Services Providers

Respondent

Johannes Theodorus Otto

Respondent

Denton Dean Henning

Respondent

Paul R Johnson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Application to Review and Set Aside Administrative Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant exhausted internal remedies before approaching the court for judicial review.
  2. 2 Whether the review application was brought within the time period prescribed by PAJA.
  3. 3 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to exempt the applicant from exhausting internal remedies.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant did not exhaust internal remedies before instituting judicial review proceedings, as required by PAJA and the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act. The applicant failed to provide credible evidence of submitting an application for leave to appeal and did not make any follow-up inquiries over a period of four years. The review application was brought well outside the 180-day period prescribed by PAJA, and the applicant did not establish exceptional circumstances to justify exemption from exhausting internal remedies. The court held that the applicant's explanations for delay were improbable and that the dispute regarding the alleged appeal...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.