Sager v Cokile and Others (NCT/75349/2017/138(1)(P)) [2018] ZANCT 7 (7 February 2018)

Sager v Cokile and Others (NCT/75349/2017/138(1)(P)) [2018] ZANCT 7 (7 February 2018)

The Tribunal found that the application for variation was justified and necessary to ensure that the payment terms for Nedbank Limited were accurately reflected in the consent order. The Tribunal confirmed that the parties are bound by a debt rearrangement facilitated by a debt counsellor under the National Credit Act. The varied order now reflects the correct payment terms for Nedbank Limited, and no other changes were made to the original order. The Tribunal emphasized the enforceability of its orders and the consequences of non-compliance, including the possibility of criminal offence under section 160(1) of the Act.

Citation
[2018] ZANCT 7
Parties
Applicant: Benay Sager; Respondent: Monwabisi Cokile; Respondent: Peggy Cokile; Respondent: Jet on behalf of Edcon (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Nedbank Limited; Respondent: RCS General Purpose RCS Card; Respondent: Russels, a division of Century Capital (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Standard Bank of South Africa Limited; Respondent: The Motor Finance Corporation (MFC), a division of Nedbank Limited; Respondent: Wesbank, a division of Firstrand Bank Limited; Respondent: Woolworths (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Woolworths Financial Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2018
Case Number
NCT/75349/2017/138(1)(P)
Procedural Posture
Variation Application / Order on Variation of Consent Order
Outcome
The application for variation of the consent order is granted. The original order is varied to reflect the correct payment terms for Nedbank Limited. All other terms remain unchanged.
Judges
A Potwana
Legal Topics
Debt Rearrangement, National Credit Act, Consent Order Variation, Enforcement of Tribunal Orders
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure Debt Rearrangement National Credit Act Consent Order Variation Enforcement of Tribunal Orders

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benay Sager

Applicant

Monwabisi Cokile

Respondent

Peggy Cokile

Respondent

Jet on behalf of Edcon (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Nedbank Limited

Respondent

RCS General Purpose RCS Card

Respondent

Russels, a division of Century Capital (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited

Respondent

The Motor Finance Corporation (MFC), a division of Nedbank Limited

Respondent

Wesbank, a division of Firstrand Bank Limited

Respondent

Woolworths (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Woolworths Financial Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Variation Application / Order on Variation of Consent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original consent order should be varied to reflect the correct payment terms for Nedbank Limited.
  2. 2 Whether the varied order complies with the requirements of the National Credit Act.
  3. 3 What are the consequences of non-compliance with the Tribunal's order.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the application for variation was justified and necessary to ensure that the payment terms for Nedbank Limited were accurately reflected in the consent order. The Tribunal confirmed that the parties are bound by a debt rearrangement facilitated by a debt counsellor under the National Credit Act. The varied order now reflects the correct payment terms for Nedbank Limited, and no other changes were made to the original order. The Tribunal emphasized the enforceability of its orders and the consequences of non-compliance, including the possibility of criminal offence under section 160(1) of the Act.

Court Disposition

The application for variation of the consent order is granted. The original order is varied to reflect the correct payment terms for Nedbank Limited. All other terms remain unchanged.

Orders

  • The payment structure between the consumers and the credit providers is confirmed as an order of the Tribunal in terms of section 150 of the Act.
  • The parties are directed to comply with the varied payment terms as set out for Nedbank Limited.