National Credit Regulator v Golden Mile Loans CC t.a Cash 4 U (NCT/158460/2020/57(1)) [2021] ZANCT 44 (28 April 2021)

National Credit Regulator v Golden Mile Loans CC t.a Cash 4 U (NCT/158460/2020/57(1)) [2021] ZANCT 44 (28 April 2021)

The Tribunal found that the interests of justice warranted granting the postponement to allow the parties to pursue settlement negotiations. The Respondent's legal representative indicated a desire to settle, and the Tribunal considered it appropriate to afford both parties an opportunity to resolve the matter amicably. The postponement was granted with the condition that, if settlement was not reached by 3 May 2021, the Registrar would set the matter down for hearing on a default basis. No order as to costs was made.

Citation
[2021] ZANCT 44
Parties
Applicant: National Credit Regulator; Respondent: Golden Mile Loans CC t.a Cash 4 U
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 April 2021
Case Number
NCT/158460/2020/57(1)
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Postponement Ruling Prior to Substantive Hearing
Outcome
The hearing of the application is postponed sine die, with directions for further proceedings if settlement is not reached.
Judges
A Potwana, K Moodaliyar, L Best
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Credit Provider Registration, Reckless Lending, Affordability Assessment, Service Fee Regulation, Postponement of Hearing
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Credit Provider Registration Reckless Lending Affordability Assessment Service Fee Regulation Postponement of Hearing

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Credit Regulator

Applicant

Golden Mile Loans CC t.a Cash 4 U

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Postponement Ruling Prior to Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent's request for postponement of the hearing should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require the parties to be afforded an opportunity to pursue settlement negotiations.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the interests of justice warranted granting the postponement to allow the parties to pursue settlement negotiations. The Respondent's legal representative indicated a desire to settle, and the Tribunal considered it appropriate to afford both parties an opportunity to resolve the matter amicably. The postponement was granted with the condition that, if settlement was not reached by 3 May 2021, the Registrar would set the matter down for hearing on a default basis. No order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

The hearing of the application is postponed sine die, with directions for further proceedings if settlement is not reached.

Orders

  • The hearing of the application is postponed sine die.
  • If the parties fail to conclude settlement negotiations by 3 May 2021, the Registrar must set the matter down for hearing.