South Africa Case Law

Bayport Securitisation Limited and Another v University of Stellenbosch Law Clinic and Others (507/2020)

Bayport Securitisation Limited and Another v University of Stellenbosch Law Clinic and Others (507/2020) [2021] ZASCA 156; 2022 (2) SA 343 (SCA) (4 November 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

507/2020

Judges

Ponnan, Makgoka, Gorven, Phatshoane, Molefe

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the definition of 'collection costs' in the National Credit Act does not include legal costs incurred during litigation. The court reaffirmed the common law distinction between collection costs and litigation costs, noting that legal costs commence with the issuing of summons and are subject to judicial discretion and taxation. The statutory language of the Act does not evidence an intention to include litigation costs within collection costs. Furthermore, section 103(5) of the Act does not apply post-judgment, as a judgment alters the character of the de…

Source excerpt

• National Credit Act
• Collection Costs
• Litigation Costs
• Declaratory Relief
• Emoluments Attachment Orders

Lonmin Ltd and Others v CG Steyn Inc t/a Steyn Attorneys and Others (M619/16)

Lonmin Ltd and Others v CG Steyn Inc t/a Steyn Attorneys and Others (M619/16) [2018] ZANWHC 10 (26 April 2018)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M619/16

Judge

Kgoele

The High Court dismissed an application challenging emoluments attachment orders because key interested parties, including consumers and issuers, were not joined.

• Emoluments Attachment Orders
• Non Joinder
• Collection Costs
• National Credit Act
• Judicial Oversight
• Class Action Requirements

Independent Plumbing Suppliers (Pty) Ltd v Thomas Classen t/a TPC Plumbing (5191/2010)

Independent Plumbing Suppliers (Pty) Ltd v Thomas Classen t/a TPC Plumbing (5191/2010) [2014] ZAGPPHC 523 (13 June 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

5191/2010

Judge

Muller

The court found that the agreement between the parties did not constitute a credit facility as defined by section 8(3) of the National Credit Act, as there was no deferral of payment or provision for interest or charges on deferred amounts. However, the agreement did qualify as an incidental credit agreement due to the inclusion of collection costs and commission, which are permissible charges under section 5(3)(a) when payment is not made by the determined date. The plaintiff's waiver of the right to claim interest or late payment fees did not alter the nature of the agreement. The court hel…

Source excerpt

• National Credit Act
• Incidental Credit Agreement
• Special Plea
• Credit Provider Registration
• Section 129 Notice
• Collection Costs