First Group Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator and Another (A32/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1947 (30 November 2023)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2023 >> [2023] ZAGPPHC 1947 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## First Group Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator and Another (A32/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1947 (30 November 2023) First Group Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator and Another (A32/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1947 (30 November 2023) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2023_1947.html sino date 30 November 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case No. A32/2023 (1)  REPORTABLE: YES /NO (2)  OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES /NO (3)  REVISED DATE: 30 November 2023 SIGNATURE: In the matter between: FIRST GROUP INVESTMENT HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD APPELLANT And NATIONAL CREDIT REGULATOR FIRST RESPONDENT THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL SECOND RESPONDENT Coram: Millar J et Ally AJ Heard on : 28 November 2023 Delivered: 30 November 2023 - This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties' representatives by email, by being uploaded to the CaseLines system of the GD and by release to SAFLII. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 12H00 on 30 November 2023. JUDGMENT THE COURT [1] This is an application for leave to appeal against a judgment and order handed down on 19 September 2023 in which the appeal of the appellant was upheld. The first respondent now applies for leave to appeal. [2] We have carefully considered the order granted and the reasons set out in the judgment together with the arguments presented at the hearing of the application for leave to appeal and in the heads of argument filed by all the parties. [3] We are not persuaded that another court would come to a different conclusion or that there are any other compelling reasons why leave to appeal ought to be granted. [4] In the circumstances it is ordered: [4.1]      The application for leave to appeal is refused with costs which costs are to include the costs consequent upon the employment of 2 counsel. A MILLAR JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA I AGREE                                                                                                                   G ALLY ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA HEARD ON: 28 NOVEMBER 2023 JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: 30 NOVEMBER 2023 COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ADV. G AMM ADV. B EDWARDS INSTRUCTED BY: HSG ATTORNEYS REFERENCE: MR. F DAVIDS COUNSEL FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT/APPLICANT: ADV. P CARSTENSEN SC ADV. P LONG INSTRUCTED BY: M INC. ATTORNEYS REFERENCE: MR. K KALPOO sino noindex make_database footer start