National Credit Regulator v Braamfin Personal Loans CC (NCT/113123/2018/57(1)) [2020] ZANCT 3 (20 February 2020)

National Credit Regulator v Braamfin Personal Loans CC (NCT/113123/2018/57(1)) [2020] ZANCT 3 (20 February 2020)

The Tribunal found that the application for confirmation of the settlement agreement as a consent order was not filed in accordance with the procedural requirements set out in the Tribunal Rules. Specifically, the necessary forms and proof of authority were not provided, and certain clauses of the settlement agreement did not comply with statutory requirements. Clause 14 incorrectly directed payment of the administrative fine to the Applicant instead of the National Revenue Fund, and the due date for payment was not specified. Clauses 10 and 19 were also found to be deficient. The Tribunal issued a directive requiring the Applicant to file a compliant application within 30 days, provide...

Citation
[2020] ZANCT 3
Parties
Applicant: National Credit Regulator; Respondent: Braamfin Personal Loans CC
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 February 2020
Case Number
NCT/113123/2018/57(1)
Procedural Posture
Consent Order Application / Directive Issued; Application for Consent Order Not Properly Filed
Outcome
Directive issued; application for consent order not confirmed due to procedural non-compliance.
Judges
A Potwana, H Alwar, M Nkomo
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Consent Order, Administrative Fine, Credit Provider Registration, Settlement Agreement
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Consent Order Administrative Fine Credit Provider Registration Settlement Agreement

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

Parties

National Credit Regulator

Applicant

Braamfin Personal Loans CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Consent Order Application / Directive Issued; Application for Consent Order Not Properly Filed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for confirmation of the settlement agreement as a consent order complies with the Tribunal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the person signing the application on behalf of the Applicant is duly authorised.
  3. 3 Whether clauses 10, 14, and 19 of the settlement agreement require amendment to comply with statutory requirements.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the application for confirmation of the settlement agreement as a consent order was not filed in accordance with the procedural requirements set out in the Tribunal Rules. Specifically, the necessary forms and proof of authority were not provided, and certain clauses of the settlement agreement did not comply with statutory requirements. Clause 14 incorrectly directed payment of the administrative fine to the Applicant instead of the National Revenue Fund, and the due date for payment was not specified. Clauses 10 and 19 were also found to be deficient. The Tribunal issued a directive requiring the Applicant to file a compliant application within 30 days, provide...

Court Disposition

Directive issued; application for consent order not confirmed due to procedural non-compliance.

Orders

  • The Applicant must file the application in accordance with the Tribunal Rules within 30 days of this directive.
  • The person signing the application on behalf of the Applicant must provide proof of authority to act.