Samuel v National Credit Regulator (NCT/91811/2017/59(1)) [2018] ZANCT 79 (26 May 2018)

Samuel v National Credit Regulator (NCT/91811/2017/59(1)) [2018] ZANCT 79 (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 and only came to the Regulator's attention upon receipt of the Notice of Set Down, after which the Regulator acted promptly. Both parties have demonstrated that the matter is important and that there are prospects of success from their respective perspectives. In the interests of administrative justice and fairness, and to ensure that both parties have the opportunity to fully ventilate the issues, condonation for the late filing was granted. The Tribunal exercised its...

Citation
[2018] ZANCT 79
Parties
Applicant: Randolph Vaughan Samuel; Respondent: National Credit Regulator
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2018
Case Number
NCT/91811/2017/59(1)
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Answering Affidavit
Outcome
Condonation granted for the late filing of the answering affidavit by the National Credit Regulator.
Judges
Laura Best
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing, Tribunal Rules, Prospects of Success
Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing Tribunal Rules Prospects of Success

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

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 are sufficient to justify condonation.
  3. 3 Whether the prospects of success and importance of the matter warrant granting condonation.

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 and only came to the Regulator's attention upon receipt of the Notice of Set Down, after which the Regulator acted promptly. Both parties have demonstrated that the matter is important and that there are prospects of success from their respective perspectives. In the interests of administrative justice and fairness, and to ensure that both parties have the opportunity to fully ventilate the issues, condonation for the late filing was granted. The Tribunal exercised its...

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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