Mabatha v Johan and Philly Auto Traders CC t/a Cars.Com11 (NCT/117449/2018/75(1)(b)) [2019] ZANCT 53 (19 April 2019)

Mabatha v Johan and Philly Auto Traders CC t/a Cars.Com11 (NCT/117449/2018/75(1)(b)) [2019] ZANCT 53 (19 April 2019)

The Tribunal found that the Respondent provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing its answering affidavit and application for condonation. The Respondent was not initially aware of the Tribunal's procedural requirements and was not legally represented at the time. Upon becoming aware, the Respondent made every effort to comply with the rules and filed the necessary documents. The Applicant did not oppose the condonation application and suffered no prejudice, as the answering affidavit was served only three days late. The Tribunal held that the interests of justice require that both parties be given an opportunity to present their cases fully. Accordingly, condonation for...

Citation
[2019] ZANCT 53
Parties
Applicant: Nolitha Mabatha; Respondent: Johan and Philly Auto Traders CC t/a Cars.Com11
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 April 2019
Case Number
NCT/117449/2018/75(1)(b)
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Answering Affidavit
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the Respondent's answering affidavit is granted.
Judges
P A Beck
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing of Answering Affidavit, Interests of Justice, Tribunal Rules, Prospects of Success
Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing of Answering Affidavit Interests of Justice Tribunal Rules Prospects of Success

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nolitha Mabatha

Applicant

Johan and Philly Auto Traders CC t/a Cars.Com11

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Answering Affidavit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent has shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of its answering affidavit.
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require that condonation be granted in the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent's explanation for the delay is reasonable and sufficient.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Respondent provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing its answering affidavit and application for condonation. The Respondent was not initially aware of the Tribunal's procedural requirements and was not legally represented at the time. Upon becoming aware, the Respondent made every effort to comply with the rules and filed the necessary documents. The Applicant did not oppose the condonation application and suffered no prejudice, as the answering affidavit was served only three days late. The Tribunal held that the interests of justice require that both parties be given an opportunity to present their cases fully. Accordingly, condonation for...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the Respondent's answering affidavit is granted.

Orders

  • The application for condonation is granted.
  • The Applicant must file her replying affidavit within 10 days of the issuing of this judgment on the Respondent and file same on the Tribunal.