Moolla v Abrahams (NCT/179004/2021/141(1)) [2021] ZANCT 19 (6 July 2021)

Moolla v Abrahams (NCT/179004/2021/141(1)) [2021] ZANCT 19 (6 July 2021)

The Tribunal found that the applicant's complaint had prescribed, as the debt review listing occurred in May 2014 and the application was only filed in February 2021, well outside the three-year period stipulated by Section 166 of the National Credit Act. The Tribunal does not have the power or discretion to extend this period or interrupt the prescription. As the respondent did not contest the application, all allegations by the applicant are deemed admitted. However, the Tribunal is bound by the statutory limitation and cannot grant leave to refer the matter. The applicant may approach the Credit Ombud for relief regarding her credit bureau listing.

Citation
[2021] ZANCT 19
Parties
Applicant: Bibi Amina Moolla; Respondent: Rudowyn Roberto Abrahams
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 July 2021
Case Number
NCT/179004/2021/141(1)
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Refer Under Section 141(1) of the National Credit Act
Outcome
Application for leave to refer refused due to prescription; no order as to costs.
Judges
J Simpson, M Peenze, B Dumisa
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Prescription of Claims, Debt Review, Leave to Refer
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Prescription of Claims Debt Review Leave to Refer

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bibi Amina Moolla

Applicant

Rudowyn Roberto Abrahams

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Refer Under Section 141(1) of the National Credit Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's complaint regarding debt review has prescribed under the National Credit Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to grant leave to refer the matter after the prescription period has lapsed.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the debt review listing removed from her credit profile.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant's complaint had prescribed, as the debt review listing occurred in May 2014 and the application was only filed in February 2021, well outside the three-year period stipulated by Section 166 of the National Credit Act. The Tribunal does not have the power or discretion to extend this period or interrupt the prescription. As the respondent did not contest the application, all allegations by the applicant are deemed admitted. However, the Tribunal is bound by the statutory limitation and cannot grant leave to refer the matter. The applicant may approach the Credit Ombud for relief regarding her credit bureau listing.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to refer refused due to prescription; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's application for leave to refer the matter directly to the Tribunal is refused.
  • There is no order as to costs.