Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
National Credit Regulator v Maoto (NCT/277089/2023/57(1)) [2024] ZANCT 16 (10 July 2024)
The Tribunal cancelled a debt counsellor’s registration, found repeated NCA breaches to be prohibited conduct, and imposed a R100,000 administrative fine.
Swuhana v National Credit Regulator (NCT/253200/2022/59(1)) [2023] ZANCT 60 (30 July 2023)
The Tribunal reviewed and set aside the NCR’s decision to hold a debt counsellor registration application in abeyance, but refused to order immediate registration.
National Credit Regulator v Munsamy (NCT/140432/2019/57(1)) [2023] ZANCT 13 (13 February 2023)
The Tribunal found that the Respondent contravened section 86(4)(b) read with Regulations 24(2) and 24(10) by failing to submit prescribed forms within statutory timeframes. However, the evidence did not support allegations of unlawful delegation of debt counselling duties or failure to notify the Applicant of significant changes affecting eligibility. The Tribunal accepted the Respondent's oral testimony as credible and found that she personally assessed over-indebtedness and communicated with consumers. The contravention was not repeated or intentional and did not warrant deregistration. An…
Source excerpt
NCR v Zahid Adams t/a SA Credit Solutions (Pty) Ltd (NCT/116600/2018/57(1)) [2021] ZANCT 32 (14 August 2021)
The Tribunal cancelled a debt counsellor’s registration for repeated National Credit Act breaches, ordered refunds and audits, and imposed a R350,000 fine.
National Credit Regulator v Abrahams (NCT/132322/2019/57(1)) [2020] ZANCT 5 (26 February 2020)
The Tribunal found repeated National Credit Act breaches by a debt counsellor, cancelled his registration, ordered audits and refunds, and imposed a R250,000 fine.
Mnweba v National Credit Regulator (NCT/129993/2019/59(1)) [2019] ZANCT 179 (30 November 2019)
The Tribunal found that the Applicant's registration as a debt counsellor lapsed automatically due to his failure to pay annual renewal fees as required by the National Credit Act. This lapsing was not the result of any decision or administrative action by the Respondent, but rather occurred by operation of law. Consequently, the NCR's instruction to the Payment Distribution Agent to cease payments was a practical administrative consequence of the lapsing and did not constitute a reviewable decision under Chapter 3 of the Act. The Tribunal concluded that it had no jurisdiction to review the l…
Source excerpt
National Credit Regulator v Grundling and Another (NCT/123277/2019/137(1)) [2019] ZANCT 154 (23 October 2019)
The Tribunal held that two debt counsellors committed prohibited conduct by failing to place a debt review application before court and breached registration conditions.
Fulton v National Credit Regulator (NCT/130744/2019/Section56(1)) [2019] ZANCT 146 (10 September 2019)
The Tribunal partly upheld a compliance notice against a debt counsellor, confirming fee and PDA compliance issues but limiting refunds to one identified consumer.
National Credit Regulator v Adams t/a SA Credit Solutions (Pty) Ltd (NCT-116600-2018-57(1)) [2019] ZANCT 70 (14 May 2019)
The National Consumer Tribunal postponed a debt-counsellor registration cancellation matter to allow the respondent to seek condonation for a late answering affidavit.
Samuel v National Credit Regulator (NCT/91811/2017/59(1)NCA) [2018] ZANCT 57 (23 August 2018)
The Tribunal found that the applicant's registration as a debt counsellor lapsed automatically by operation of law due to his failure to pay annual renewal fees for three consecutive years (2014, 2015, and 2016), as required by the National Credit Act. The Regulator's notification of lapsing was not an administrative decision but a consequence of statutory provisions. The applicant's argument that the Regulator acted ultra vires was rejected, as the lapsing is peremptory and not subject to discretion. The Tribunal held that the applicant must cease all debt counselling activities and that rei…
Source excerpt
Explore more
