Ruyobeza v Telkom SA SOC (Ltd) (NCT/94271/2017/141(1)) [2018] ZANCT 80 (20 June 2018)

Ruyobeza v Telkom SA SOC (Ltd) (NCT/94271/2017/141(1)) [2018] ZANCT 80 (20 June 2018)

The Tribunal found that it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter under the CPA because the applicant did not initiate a complaint with the National Consumer Commission and did not receive a notice of non-referral. The Tribunal also found that the agreement between the parties was not a credit agreement as defined by the NCA, as there was no evidence that credit was advanced or that payment terms allowed for deferred or partial payments. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that there were no reasonable prospects of success for the applicant's referral and dismissed the application for leave to refer.

Citation
[2018] ZANCT 80
Parties
Applicant: Barimwotubiri Ruyobeza; Respondent: Telkom SA SOC (Ltd)
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 June 2018
Case Number
NCT/94271/2017/141(1)
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Refer Complaint Directly to Tribunal Under Section 141(1)(b) of the NCA
Outcome
Application for leave to refer is dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
MC Peenze, D Terblanche, J Simpson
Legal Topics
Leave to Refer, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Credit Agreement Definition, Consumer Protection Act, National Credit Act
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Refer Jurisdiction of Tribunal Credit Agreement Definition Consumer Protection Act National Credit Act

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

Parties

Barimwotubiri Ruyobeza

Applicant

Telkom SA SOC (Ltd)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Refer Complaint Directly to Tribunal Under Section 141(1)(b) of the NCA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal may grant the applicant leave to refer the matter directly to the Tribunal under section 141(1)(b) of the NCA.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to adjudicate a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act where no complaint was initiated with the National Consumer Commission.
  3. 3 Whether the agreement between the parties constitutes a credit agreement under the National Credit Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter under the CPA because the applicant did not initiate a complaint with the National Consumer Commission and did not receive a notice of non-referral. The Tribunal also found that the agreement between the parties was not a credit agreement as defined by the NCA, as there was no evidence that credit was advanced or that payment terms allowed for deferred or partial payments. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that there were no reasonable prospects of success for the applicant's referral and dismissed the application for leave to refer.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to refer is dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • This application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.