TGI Autobrokers (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator (NCT/122551/2018/140(1)) [2019] ZANCT 43 (20 April 2019)

TGI Autobrokers (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator (NCT/122551/2018/140(1)) [2019] ZANCT 43 (20 April 2019)

The Tribunal found that the Respondent had not filed an answering affidavit and had not provided any indication of its defence in the main matter. The application for condonation was premature, as condonation for late filing can only be considered once the relevant document is actually filed. The Tribunal emphasized...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] ZANCT 43
Parties
Applicant: TGI Autobrokers (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: National Credit Regulator
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 April 2019
Case Number
NCT/122551/2018/140(1)
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Filing of Answering Affidavit
Outcome
The application for condonation for the late filing of the Respondent's answering affidavit is dismissed as premature.
Judges
T Woker
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing of Affidavit, Tribunal Rules, Interests of Justice
Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing of Affidavit Tribunal Rules Interests of Justice

Source-derived case record

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 7 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TGI Autobrokers (Pty) Ltd

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 Respondent's answering affidavit.
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent has provided a reasonable explanation for its default and prospects of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Respondent had not filed an answering affidavit and had not provided any indication of its defence in the main matter. The application for condonation was premature, as condonation for late filing can only be considered once the relevant document is actually filed. The Tribunal emphasized that the degree of lateness and prospects of success are critical factors, and without an answering affidavit, these cannot be assessed. Therefore, condonation was refused at this stage, but the Respondent may apply for condonation if it files its answering affidavit in future and sets out the reasons for the delay.

Court Disposition

The application for condonation for the late filing of the Respondent's answering affidavit is dismissed as premature.

Orders

  • The application for condonation for the late filing of the Respondent's answering affidavit is dismissed.
  • Should the Respondent choose to file an answering affidavit in due course, it may then file an application for condonation and set out the factors which led to its late filing.