National Consumer Commission v Braai Block (Pty) Ltd (NCT/341406/2024/73(2)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 66 (10 December 2024)

National Consumer Commission v Braai Block (Pty) Ltd (NCT/341406/2024/73(2)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 66 (10 December 2024)

The Tribunal found that the respondent contravened sections 23(6)(a) and 26(3)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act by charging service fees not reflected in displayed prices and failing to include trading addresses on tax invoices. The respondent admitted the conduct and failed to file an answering affidavit or condonation application as ordered. The Tribunal held that the prohibited conduct was serious, ongoing across 16 branches, and deprived consumers of informed choice and financial rights. The Tribunal declined to grant an interdict, finding it unnecessary where the statute already proscribes the conduct. An administrative fine of R1,000,000 was imposed to deter similar conduct and...

Citation
[2024] ZANCT 66
Parties
Applicant: National Consumer Commission; Respondent: Braai Block (Pty) Ltd
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 December 2024
Case Number
NCT/341406/2024/73(2)(b)
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Determination After Unopposed Hearing
Outcome
Application granted in part; prohibited conduct declared; administrative penalty imposed; interdict refused.
Judges
A Potwana, Z Ntuli, S Hockey
Legal Topics
Consumer Protection Act, Administrative Penalty, Prohibited Conduct, Displayed Price, Transaction Record Requirements
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Consumer Protection Act Administrative Penalty Prohibited Conduct Displayed Price Transaction Record Requirements

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Consumer Commission

Applicant

Braai Block (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Determination After Unopposed Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the respondent contravene sections 23(6)(a) and 26(3)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act by charging service fees not reflected in displayed prices and failing to include trading addresses on tax invoices?
  2. 2 Is the respondent liable for an administrative penalty under section 112 of the Consumer Protection Act?
  3. 3 Is an interdict appropriate in circumstances where the prohibited conduct is already proscribed by statute?

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the respondent contravened sections 23(6)(a) and 26(3)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act by charging service fees not reflected in displayed prices and failing to include trading addresses on tax invoices. The respondent admitted the conduct and failed to file an answering affidavit or condonation application as ordered. The Tribunal held that the prohibited conduct was serious, ongoing across 16 branches, and deprived consumers of informed choice and financial rights. The Tribunal declined to grant an interdict, finding it unnecessary where the statute already proscribes the conduct. An administrative fine of R1,000,000 was imposed to deter similar conduct and...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; prohibited conduct declared; administrative penalty imposed; interdict refused.

Orders

  • The respondent contravened sections 23(6)(a) and 26(3)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act.
  • The respondent's contravention is declared prohibited conduct.