Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Tax Law [2022] ZASCA 97

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Capitec Bank Limited (94/2021)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Capitec Bank Limited (94/2021) [2022] ZASCA 97; [2022] 3 All SA 641 (SCA); 2022 (6) SA 76 (SCA); 85 SATC 311 (21 June 2022)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
94/2021
Judges
Saldulker, Mocumie, Makgoka, Schippers, Musi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Capitec Bank Limited did not charge its customers any consideration for the loan cover supplied under its unsecured lending contracts. The loan cover was provided free of charge, as evidenced by the loan agreements and Capitec's annual report. The supply of credit is an exempt financial service under the VAT Act, and the loan cover was supplied in the course of providing credit, not as a separate taxable supply. The fees charged by Capitec (initiation and service fees) were regulated under the National Credit Act and did not include charges for insurance…

Source excerpt

  • Value Added Tax
  • Input Tax Deduction
  • Exempt Supply
  • Financial Services
  • Credit Insurance
  • Tax Penalty Remission
Read case analysis
Banking And Finance [2016] ZANCT 33

National Credit Regulator v Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd and Another (NCT/27651/2015/140(1))

National Credit Regulator v Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd and Another (NCT/27651/2015/140(1)) [2016] ZANCT 33 (9 September 2016)

Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Case number
NCT/27651/2015/140(1)
Judges
J Simpson, D Terblanche, H Devraj

The Tribunal found that Monarch Insurance is not a credit provider and is not subject to the National Credit Act; thus, the application against Monarch was dismissed. The Tribunal held that the National Credit Regulator's investigation and referral were lawful and valid, as the NCA does not require the complaint to be tested or limit the investigation to the original complaint. Lewis Stores was found to have contravened section 106(2)(a) of the NCA by offering or demanding loss of employment insurance from pensioners and unemployed consumers, and disability insurance from pensioners, which wa…

Source excerpt

  • National Credit Act
  • Credit Insurance
  • Prohibited Conduct
  • Unreasonable Terms
  • Administrative Penalty
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.