Ndima and Another v Nedbank Limited and Another (NCT/130810/2019/148(1)) [2019] ZANCT 126 (9 August 2019)

Ndima and Another v Nedbank Limited and Another (NCT/130810/2019/148(1)) [2019] ZANCT 126 (9 August 2019)

The Tribunal found that the appellants were just over three months late in filing the leave application, but the delay was adequately explained by ongoing settlement negotiations with the first respondent, who consented to the late filing. The Tribunal held that the interests of justice favored condonation, as the matter was important to the appellants, particularly given the first appellant's financial distress, and the respondents did not oppose the application. The Tribunal further found that the appellants had reasonable prospects of success in the main matter, as there was evidence that the first respondent may not have considered all relevant debt obligations during affordability...

Citation
[2019] ZANCT 126
Parties
Applicant: Nomathemba Ndima; Applicant: Myrlene Pieterse; Respondent: Nedbank Limited; Respondent: National Credit Regulator
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 August 2019
Case Number
NCT/130810/2019/148(1)
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Condonation for Late Referral to Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal upheld; condonation for late referral granted.
Judges
T Bailey, A Potwana, H Devraj
Legal Topics
Condonation of Late Filing, Reckless Lending, Affordability Assessment, Leave to Refer, Consumer Credit
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure Condonation of Late Filing Reckless Lending Affordability Assessment Leave to Refer Consumer Credit

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nomathemba Ndima

Applicant

Myrlene Pieterse

Applicant

Nedbank Limited

Respondent

National Credit Regulator

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Condonation for Late Referral to Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants have shown good cause for condonation of their late referral to the Tribunal.
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require condonation for the late filing of the leave application.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants have reasonable prospects of success in the main matter concerning alleged reckless lending.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the appellants were just over three months late in filing the leave application, but the delay was adequately explained by ongoing settlement negotiations with the first respondent, who consented to the late filing. The Tribunal held that the interests of justice favored condonation, as the matter was important to the appellants, particularly given the first appellant's financial distress, and the respondents did not oppose the application. The Tribunal further found that the appellants had reasonable prospects of success in the main matter, as there was evidence that the first respondent may not have considered all relevant debt obligations during affordability...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; condonation for late referral granted.

Orders

  • The ruling of the single member of the Tribunal dated 29 March 2019 refusing condonation is set aside.
  • The appellants' late referral of the leave application is condoned.