National Credit Regulator v Mr Price Group Limited (NCT/81672/2017/140(1)) [2017] ZANCT 133 (9 November 2017)

National Credit Regulator v Mr Price Group Limited (NCT/81672/2017/140(1)) [2017] ZANCT 133 (9 November 2017)

The Tribunal found that the application for condonation was not opposed by the Respondent, who expressly consented to the late filing. The Tribunal considered that the Respondent would not suffer prejudice and that the Applicant had communicated its intention to file the replying affidavit late. Applying the principles from the relevant case law and Tribunal Rules, the Tribunal held that condonation should be granted in the interests of justice, as the Applicant had shown good cause and the delay was not unreasonable or prejudicial.

Citation
[2017] ZANCT 133
Parties
Applicant: National Credit Regulator; Respondent: Mr Price Group Limited
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 November 2017
Case Number
NCT/81672/2017/140(1)
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Replying Affidavit
Outcome
Condonation granted for the Applicant to file its replying affidavit. No order as to costs.
Judges
X May
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing, National Credit Act, Replying Affidavit
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Condonation Late Filing National Credit Act Replying Affidavit

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Credit Regulator

Applicant

Mr Price Group Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Replying Affidavit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the Applicant's late filing of its replying affidavit in terms of the Tribunal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent will suffer prejudice if condonation is granted.
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant has shown good cause for the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the application for condonation was not opposed by the Respondent, who expressly consented to the late filing. The Tribunal considered that the Respondent would not suffer prejudice and that the Applicant had communicated its intention to file the replying affidavit late. Applying the principles from the relevant case law and Tribunal Rules, the Tribunal held that condonation should be granted in the interests of justice, as the Applicant had shown good cause and the delay was not unreasonable or prejudicial.

Court Disposition

Condonation granted for the Applicant to file its replying affidavit. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Condonation is hereby granted for the Applicant to file its Replying Affidavit.
  • No order is made as to costs.