Samuel v National Credit Regulator (NCT/91811/2017159(1)) [2018] ZANCT 65 (26 May 2018)

Samuel v National Credit Regulator (NCT/91811/2017159(1)) [2018] ZANCT 65 (26 May 2018)

The Tribunal found that while the delay in filing the answering affidavit by the National Credit Regulator was concerning, the explanation provided was plausible under the circumstances. The application was misplaced due to administrative oversight and, upon discovery, the Regulator acted promptly to rectify the situation. Both parties have demonstrated that the matter is important and have prospects of success in the main application. In the interests of administrative justice and fairness, and to allow both parties to fully ventilate the issues, condonation for the late filing was granted.

Citation
[2018] ZANCT 65
Parties
Applicant: Randolph Vaughan Samuel; Respondent: National Credit Regulator
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2018
Case Number
NCT/91811/2017159(1)
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Answering Affidavit
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the answering affidavit by the National Credit Regulator is granted.
Judges
Laura Best
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing, Tribunal Rules, Good Cause, Administrative Justice
Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing Tribunal Rules Good Cause Administrative Justice

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Randolph Vaughan Samuel

Applicant

National Credit Regulator

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the answering affidavit by the National Credit Regulator.
  2. 2 Whether the reasons for the delay constitute good cause under Tribunal Rule 34.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice and fairness require that both parties be allowed to fully ventilate the main matter.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that while the delay in filing the answering affidavit by the National Credit Regulator was concerning, the explanation provided was plausible under the circumstances. The application was misplaced due to administrative oversight and, upon discovery, the Regulator acted promptly to rectify the situation. Both parties have demonstrated that the matter is important and have prospects of success in the main application. In the interests of administrative justice and fairness, and to allow both parties to fully ventilate the issues, condonation for the late filing was granted.

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the answering affidavit by the National Credit Regulator is granted.

Orders

  • Condonation is hereby granted for the late filing of the Answering Affidavit by the Applicant.
  • No order as to costs.