Bokaba v Muzdalifah Investment CC trading as Bargain Motors (Pristine Motors) (NCT/326277/2024/75(1)(b))
Bokaba v Muzdalifah Investment CC trading as Bargain Motors (Pristine Motors) (NCT/326277/2024/75(1)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 22 (8 April 2025)
The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove that the vehicle remained defective after the respondent’s repairs. The independent diagnosis confirmed the vehicle was in good working order. The Tribunal applied the Plascon-Evans rule and found no basis to reject the respondent’s version. The remaining noise did not constitute a defect under the CPA, as clarified by the Supreme Court of Appeal. The applicant’s requests for reimbursement of expenses, payment of the auction shortfall, and a letter to Standard Bank Limited lacked legal and factual basis, as the respondent was not party to…
Source excerpt
- Consumer Protection Act
- Defective Goods
- Purchase Agreement Cancellation
- Credit Bureau Listing