Netshivhuyu v Kia Motors South Africa (Pty) Limited t/a Kia Hatfield (NCT/96644/2017/75(1)(b)) [2018] ZANCT 144 (12 November 2018)

Netshivhuyu v Kia Motors South Africa (Pty) Limited t/a Kia Hatfield (NCT/96644/2017/75(1)(b)) [2018] ZANCT 144 (12 November 2018)

The Tribunal found that it is only empowered to confirm settlement agreements as consent orders if the agreement relates to prohibited or required conduct under the Consumer Protection Act or National Credit Act. The settlement agreement presented by the parties expressly denied any prohibited conduct and included clauses that could nullify the Tribunal's powers or exclude statutory consequences for non-compliance. These provisions placed the agreement outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal further noted that statutory powers cannot be excluded or circumvented by private agreement, and the offending clauses conflicted with the enabling legislation. Accordingly, the Tribunal...

Citation
[2018] ZANCT 144
Parties
Applicant: Mbavhalelo Jimmy Netshivhuyu; Respondent: Kia Motors South Africa (Pty) Limited t/a Kia Hatfield
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 2018
Case Number
NCT/96644/2017/75(1)(b)
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Confirmation of Settlement Agreement as Consent Order
Outcome
The Tribunal declined to confirm the settlement agreement as an order of the Tribunal due to lack of jurisdiction and statutory conflict.
Judges
K Moodaliyar, A Potwana, L Best
Legal Topics
Consumer Protection Act, Consent Orders, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Settlement Agreements
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Consumer Protection Act Consent Orders Jurisdiction of Tribunal Settlement Agreements

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

Parties

Mbavhalelo Jimmy Netshivhuyu

Applicant

Kia Motors South Africa (Pty) Limited t/a Kia Hatfield

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Confirmation of Settlement Agreement as Consent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to confirm the settlement agreement as a consent order under the Consumer Protection Act.
  2. 2 Whether the terms of the settlement agreement relate to prohibited or required conduct under the enabling legislation.
  3. 3 Whether any clauses in the settlement agreement exclude the Tribunal's powers or conflict with statutory provisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that it is only empowered to confirm settlement agreements as consent orders if the agreement relates to prohibited or required conduct under the Consumer Protection Act or National Credit Act. The settlement agreement presented by the parties expressly denied any prohibited conduct and included clauses that could nullify the Tribunal's powers or exclude statutory consequences for non-compliance. These provisions placed the agreement outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal further noted that statutory powers cannot be excluded or circumvented by private agreement, and the offending clauses conflicted with the enabling legislation. Accordingly, the Tribunal...

Court Disposition

The Tribunal declined to confirm the settlement agreement as an order of the Tribunal due to lack of jurisdiction and statutory conflict.

Orders

  • The settlement agreement entered into between the applicant and respondent on 14 August 2018 falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction to confirm as a consent order.
  • No order is made as to costs.