National Credit Regulator v Alt Bridge Capital (Pty) Ltd (NCT/158515/2020/140(1)) [2025] ZANCT 19 (17 April 2025)

National Credit Regulator v Alt Bridge Capital (Pty) Ltd (NCT/158515/2020/140(1)) [2025] ZANCT 19 (17 April 2025)

The Tribunal found that the settlement agreement between the applicant and respondent related directly to the respondent's contraventions of the National Credit Act and was legally and practically capable of being made an order. The Tribunal exercised its discretion under section 138(1)(b) of the NCA, satisfied that the agreement was not contrary to public policy and would prevent further litigation. The Tribunal confirmed the settlement agreement as a consent order, making its terms enforceable and binding on the parties.

Citation
[2025] ZANCT 19
Parties
Applicant: National Credit Regulator; Respondent: Alt Bridge Capital (Pty) Ltd
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 April 2025
Case Number
NCT/158515/2020/140(1)
Procedural Posture
Consent Order Application / Order Granted After Settlement Agreement
Outcome
The settlement agreement is confirmed and made an order of the Tribunal. No cost order is granted.
Judges
C Sassman
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Consent Order, Settlement Agreement, Administrative Fine
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Consent Order Settlement Agreement Administrative Fine

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Credit Regulator

Applicant

Alt Bridge Capital (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Consent Order Application / Order Granted After Settlement Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement between the parties should be confirmed as a consent order under section 138(1)(b) of the National Credit Act.
  2. 2 Whether the terms of the settlement agreement are competent, proper, and not contrary to public policy.
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to grant the order sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the settlement agreement between the applicant and respondent related directly to the respondent's contraventions of the National Credit Act and was legally and practically capable of being made an order. The Tribunal exercised its discretion under section 138(1)(b) of the NCA, satisfied that the agreement was not contrary to public policy and would prevent further litigation. The Tribunal confirmed the settlement agreement as a consent order, making its terms enforceable and binding on the parties.

Court Disposition

The settlement agreement is confirmed and made an order of the Tribunal. No cost order is granted.

Orders

  • The settlement agreement concluded by the parties on 26 February 2025, annexed as 'Annexure A to NCR v Alt Bridge Capital (Pty) Ltd – NCT-158515-2020-140(1)', is confirmed and made an order of the Tribunal in terms of section 138(1)(b).
  • There is no cost order.