South Africa Case Law

Matjeding v Tent Technics (GCC 13/2022)

Matjeding v Tent Technics (GCC 13/2022) [2023] ZACONAF 1 (16 March 2023)

Court

Consumer Affairs Court

Case number

GCC 13/2022

Judges

M A du Plessis, M Phukubje, P Samuels, P Opperman

The court found that the first mobile freezer supplied by the defendant was not of good quality or durable for a reasonable period, as required by the Consumer Protection Act. The plaintiff acted within the statutory six-month period by returning the freezer for repairs multiple times, and when defects persisted, he was entitled to a refund under section 56(3). The defendant's speculation regarding misuse was unsupported by evidence. The claim for the second mobile freezer was dismissed because it was not returned within the statutory period, and the court declined to extend this period, citi…

Source excerpt

• Consumer Protection Act
• Implied Warranty Of Quality
• Refund Claim
• Defective Goods
• Unfair Business Practice

Ntuli v South Streams Construction (GCC/05/2021)

Ntuli v South Streams Construction (GCC/05/2021) [2022] ZACONAF 20 (25 January 2022)

Court

Consumer Affairs Court

Case number

GCC/05/2021

Judges

M A du Plessis, Z Mpungose, P Opperman

The court enforced a settlement agreement, ordering the defendant to pay the agreed amount and prescribed interest after finding non-payment and consumer law breaches.

• Consumer Protection Act
• Unfair Business Practice
• Settlement Agreement Enforcement
• Consumer-protection
• Unfair-business-practice
• Settlement-agreement-enforcement

Orsmond v Thoabala (FSCAC2020/11-4)

Orsmond v Thoabala (FSCAC2020/11-4) [2020] ZACONAF 3 (18 December 2020)

Court

Consumer Affairs Court

Case number

FSCAC2020/11-4

Judges

P du P Greyling, R-M Jansen, A G Sefo, G J Bredenkamp, F Botha

Consumer affairs tribunal partially upheld a vehicle-repair complaint, ordering a gearbox repair or refund and a partial refund for later repair charges.

• Consumer Protection Act
• Service Quality
• Warranty On Repaired Goods
• Unfair Business Practice
• Consumer-protection-act
• Vehicle-repairs

Verwey v Sunrose GP (Pty) Ltd t/a Sunrose Online (GCC/07/2019)

Verwey v Sunrose GP (Pty) Ltd t/a Sunrose Online (GCC/07/2019) [2019] ZACONAF 4 (3 December 2019)

Court

Consumer Affairs Court

Case number

GCC/07/2019

Judges

M. Phukubje, M. A. Du Plessis, I. Opperman

The Defendant supplied a food mixer to the Plaintiff that was represented as having a 40-litre bowl capacity, but in fact only held approximately 31 litres. The Plaintiff relied on the specifications in the brochure and labelling, and the discrepancy rendered the mixer unsuitable for its intended business purpose. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant immediately, returned the mixer, and sought a refund. The Defendant's procedural objections were dismissed, and its offers to replace the bowl or reduce the price were belated and not implemented. The Consumer Protection Act entitles consumers to…

Source excerpt

• Consumer Protection Act
• Implied Warranty Of Quality
• Unfair Business Practice
• Refund Claim
• Contractual Misrepresentation

Mmusi v Scheepers Boorwerke (Pty) Ltd t/a Eunever Trading 405 (NW08/2017)

Mmusi v Scheepers Boorwerke (Pty) Ltd t/a Eunever Trading 405 (NW08/2017) [2018] ZACONAF 12 (2 October 2018)

Court

Consumer Affairs Court

Case number

NW08/2017

Judges

J. Nkomo, P. Hlahane, K. Kgomongwe

Consumer affairs tribunal found the supplier committed unfair business practice by taking payment without fully rendering borehole drilling services.

• Consumer Protection Act
• Unfair Business Practice
• Specific Performance
• Contractual Remedies
• Consumer-protection
• Unfair-business-practice

Molamu v Riedewaan Gora t/a Auto Sales Warehouse (NW09/2017)

Molamu v Riedewaan Gora t/a Auto Sales Warehouse (NW09/2017) [2018] ZACONAF 14 (12 June 2018)

Court

Consumer Affairs Court

Case number

NW09/2017

Judges

J.Nkomo, P. Hlahane, K.Kgomongwe

The Consumer Affairs Court enforced a signed acknowledgement of debt and ordered the defendant to repay R68,000 in monthly instalments, with acceleration on default.

• Unfair Business Practice
• Contract Of Sale
• Acknowledgement Of Debt
• Acknowledgement-of-debt
• Motor-vehicle-sale
• Consumer-dispute

Catharina and Another v Acker (4840/2005)

Catharina and Another v Acker (4840/2005) [2010] ZAFSHC 63 (1 July 2010)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4840/2005

Judge

S P B Hancke

The court found, on a balance of probabilities, that Noite Dia Trust operated an unlawful banking business by accepting deposits from the public without being registered as a bank, in contravention of section 11 of the Banks Act. The investment scheme constituted an unfair business practice as defined in the Consumer Affairs (Unfair Business Practices) Act and relevant regulations, specifically as a pyramid promotional scheme. All agreements entered into for investment purposes with the Trust were declared void ab initio. The court held that the hearsay evidence relied upon by the applicants…

Source excerpt

• Banking Act Violation
• Pyramid Scheme
• Unfair Business Practice
• Nullity Of Contract
• Hearsay Evidence
• Motion Procedure