Magaya and Another v First National Bank a Division of Firstrand Bank Limited and Another (NCT/133952/2019/165) [2019] ZANCT 148 (9 September 2019)
- Citation
- [2019] ZANCT 148
- Status
- Ruling
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- National Consumer Tribunal
- Panel
- H Devraj, F Manamela, N Maseti
- Case number
- NCT/133952/2019/165
More details
- Court
- National Consumer Tribunal
- Panel
- H Devraj, F Manamela, N Maseti
- Case number
- NCT/133952/2019/165
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal was satisfied that all parties were properly notified of the hearing date, time, and venue. In accordance with Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Rules, the application was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the applicant, consumer, and respondents. The Tribunal confirmed that no substantive arguments or evidence were presented, and the dismissal was issued ex tempore on the record. There was no order as to costs.
Court disposition
Application dismissed for non-appearance; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The application lodged in terms of Section 165 of the National Credit Act is dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Evericious Magaya
ApplicantNellia Dube
ApplicantFirst National Bank a Division of Firstrand Bank Limited
RespondentNedbank Limited
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Review Application / Application for Variation of Debt Re Arrangement Order Under Section 165 of the National Credit Act; Hearing Dismissed for Non Appearance.
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application to vary the debt re-arrangement order should be entertained in the absence of all parties.
- 02
Whether proper notice of the hearing was given to all parties.
- 03
Whether the Tribunal should dismiss the application for non-appearance.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant sought to vary the previously confirmed debt re-arrangement order, alleging that the repayment terms and concession period for Nedbank Limited were not as per the acceptance letter. No further argument was presented due to non-appearance.
- Respondent
- No arguments were presented by the respondents as neither they nor their representatives appeared at the hearing.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Rules (GN 789 of 28 August 2007, as amended)
If an applicant fails to attend or be represented at any hearing, the presiding member may dismiss the matter by issuing a written ruling, provided the party was properly notified.
- 02
Rule 24(2) of the National Consumer Tribunal Rules
The presiding member must be satisfied that the parties were properly notified of the date, time, and venue of the proceedings before making any decision to dismiss.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal was satisfied that all parties were properly notified of the hearing date, time, and venue. In accordance with Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Rules, the application was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the applicant, consumer, and respondents. The Tribunal confirmed that no substantive arguments or evidence were presented, and the dismissal was issued ex tempore on the record. There was no order as to costs.
Obiter and limits
- The Tribunal reiterates the importance of parties attending hearings to ensure that their interests are properly represented and adjudicated.
- The dismissal of the application does not affect the previously confirmed debt re-arrangement order.
Court disposition
Application dismissed for non-appearance; no order as to costs.
- The application lodged in terms of Section 165 of the National Credit Act is dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
Source and reliance status
National Consumer Tribunal
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
National Consumer Tribunal
Ruling
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
IN
THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL
HELD
IN CENTURION
Case Number: NCT/133952/2019/165
In the matter between:
EVERCIOUS
MAGAYA APPLICANT
NCRDC 2449
And
NELLIA
DUBE CONSUMER
ID NO: […]
FIRST NATIONAL BANK A DIVISION OF FIRSTRAND 1ST
RESPONDENT
BANK
LIMITED
NEDBANK LIMITED 2ND
RESPONDENT
Coram:
Ms H Devraj – Presiding member
Adv F Manamela – Tribunal Member
Ms N Maseti – Tribunal Member
Date of hearing – 5 September 2019
RULING
AND REASONS
APPLICANT
1. The Applicant is Evericious Magaya, a debt counsellor registered in accordance with the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (“the Act”) (the “Applicant”).
CONSUMER
AND RESPONDENTS
2. The Consumer is Nellia Dube, who is under debt review. The First and Second Respondents are registered with the National Credit Regulator as credit providers (hereinafter all the Respondents are collectively referred to as “the Respondents”).
BACKGROUND
3. On 22 May 2019; the debt re-arrangement agreement between the Consumer and the First and Second Respondents was confirmed as an order of the Tribunal as per case number NCT/129939/2019/138(1).
4. On 25 June 2019; the Applicant lodged an application with the Tribunal in terms of Section 165 of the Act to have the order varied.
5. The basis of the Application is that the repayment terms and the concession period for Nedbank Limited; was not as per the acceptance letter.
6. The notice of set down was issued by the Registrar on 26 July 2019 for the hearing on 5 September 2019.
7. On the date of the hearing there was no appearance by the Applicant, the Consumer, or any of the Respondents.
DISMISSAL
OF APPLICATION
8. As stated above there was no appearance by the Applicant, Consumer or the Respondents or any representative on the date of the hearing.
9. Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Rules[1] provides that:
“Non- appearance
(1) If a party to a matter fails to attend or be represented at any hearing or any proceedings, and that party-
(a) is the applicant, the presiding member may dismiss the matter by issuing a
written ruling; or
(b) is not the applicant, the presiding member may-
(i) continue with the proceedings in the absence of that party; or
(ii) adjourn the hearing to a later date
(2) The Presiding member must be satisfied that the party had been properly notified of the date, time and venue of the proceedings, before making any decision in terms of subrule (1)
(3) If a matter is dismissed, the Registrar must send a copy of the ruling to the parties.”
10. The Presiding Member of the Tribunal was satisfied that the parties were properly notified of the date, time and venue for the proceedings.
11. The application was then formally dismissed by the Tribunal on record – ex tempore.
ORDER
12. Accordingly, the Tribunal hereby confirms the ex-tempore order issued at the hearing stating that:
12.1 The application lodged in terms of Section 165 of the Act is hereby dismissed; and
12.2 There is no order as to costs.
DATED ON THIS 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019
[signed]
Ms. H Devraj
Presiding Member
Adv F Manamela (Tribunal member) and Ms N Maseti (Tribunal member) concurring
[1] GN 789 of 28 August 2007: Regulations for matters relating to the functions of the Tribunal and Rules for the conduct of matters before the National Consumer Tribunal, 2007 (Government Gazette No. 30225) - as amended by Government Gazette Date GN 428 Notice 34405 of 29 June 2011 and Government Gazette GNR.203 Notice 38557 of 13 March 2015
[1] GN 789 of 28 August 2007: Regulations for matters relating to the functions of the Tribunal and Rules for the conduct of matters before the National Consumer Tribunal, 2007 (Government Gazette No. 30225) -
as amended by Government Gazette Date GN 428 Notice 34405 of 29 June 2011 and Government Gazette GNR.203 Notice 38557 of 13 March 2015
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.