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
Forrest v Malabar Hill (Pty) Ltd (NCT/287104/2023/75(2)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 31 (31 August 2024)
The Tribunal found a custom-made carpet did not match the ordered colour and size, held the CPA was breached, and ordered a full refund.
Singh v Masstores (Pty) Ltd Trading as MAKRO (NCT/219207/2022/75(1)(b)) [2022] ZANCT 25 (27 June 2022)
The Tribunal found a fridge delivered by Makro was defective under the CPA and ordered a refund of R11,499.00, with the respondent to collect it at its own cost.
Fourie v Agenbag Motor Group (NW12/2017) [2018] ZACONAF 3 (4 May 2018)
The court found that the defendant failed to disclose any defects to the plaintiff at the time of sale, rendering the voetstoots clause unenforceable under the Consumer Protection Act. The Act requires transparent and honest dealings, and prohibits contractual terms that deprive consumers of statutory rights. The plaintiff reported defects within 14 days of delivery, well within the six-month period prescribed by section 56. The defendant's reliance on the discount and waiver was rejected, as these did not override the plaintiff's statutory rights. The plaintiff was entitled to a refund of th…
Source excerpt
Perumal v South African Motorcycles (Pty) Ltd t/a Big Boy Scooters (NCT/86201/2017/75(1)(b)) [2018] ZANCT 4 (21 March 2018)
The Tribunal dismissed a consumer’s refund claim over motorbikes supplied with incorrect wheels, ordering instead free replacement and fitting of the correct wheels.
Perumal v Big Boy Scooters (SA Motorcycles (Pty) Ltd) (NCT/86201/2017/75(1)(b)) [2017] ZANCT 117 (8 October 2017)
The Tribunal granted leave to refer a consumer complaint about misdescribed bikes, alleged false advertising, and refusal of refund or compliant replacement.
Assessment: Defective Goods - Leather Lounge (201701/0011789) [2017] ZACGSO 5 (20 April 2017)
The Ombud found no manufacturer’s defect in a leather lounge suite and held that, after inspection, the complainant was not entitled to a refund.
Defective Wheelchair (201505-0125) [2015] ZACGSO 7 (17 September 2015)
The Ombud could not determine whether a wheelchair was defective or damaged through misuse, and could not confirm a refund right under the Consumer Protection Act.
Explore more
