Theodorus Vonk v Willow Crest Motors CC
[2019] ZANCT 63 (also cited as [2019] ZANCT 68 — SAFLII duplicate)
- primary url https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANCT/2019/68.html
- wayback url https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANCT/2019/68.html
- nct pdf https://www.thenct.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Theodorus-Vonk-v-Willow-Crest-Motors-CC-NCT-115078-2018-751-b.pdf
- alternate url https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANCT/2019/63.html
- src/content/pages/aedilitian-remedies.md — voetstoots section Aedilitian remedies →
[2019] ZANCT 63 / 68 | National Consumer Tribunal | 6 April 2019
Proposition cited on the site
The voetstoots (“as-is”) clause does not apply to transactions falling under the CPA.
Quoted on the site (verbatim from the judgment as widely cited in secondary commentary):
“the concept of a ‘voetstoots’ sale… is therefore not applicable to any transactions falling under the CPA”
Facts
The Applicant (Theodorus Vonk) purchased a vehicle from the Respondent (Willow Crest Motors CC) which had a serious gearbox problem. The sales agreement contained a voetstoots clause. The Applicant lodged a complaint first with the Motor Industry Ombudsman of South Africa (MIOSA) under CPA s 72(1)(a), then with the National Consumer Commission, before referring the matter to the Tribunal.
Held (operative)
- The voetstoots clause was a clear breach of CPA s 51 — a contractual term purporting to waive the consumer’s s 56 statutory rights is void to the extent of the contravention.
- Selling a vehicle with serious safety implications (gearbox problem) was also a breach of CPA s 55 (right to safe, good-quality goods).
- The Respondent was ordered to make remedial undertakings; the conduct was found to be prohibited.
Citation note
SAFLII holds both [2019] ZANCT 63 and [2019] ZANCT 68 for the same judgment (same parties, same NCT case number NCT/115078/2018/75(1)(b), same 6 April 2019 decision). The duplicate is a SAFLII housekeeping artefact. Both URLs resolve to the same judgment. The site uses [2019] ZANCT 63; this file’s primary_url points to the ZANCT 68 path because that’s where SAFLII currently serves the judgment. Either citation is defensible.
Parallel authority
See Fourie-Agenbag-ZACONAF-3-2018.md for the North West Consumer Affairs Court’s parallel holding (NW12/2017, 4 May 2018), which the site now correctly attributes to the Consumer Affairs Court rather than to the National Consumer Tribunal.
Cross-references
- CPA s 51 (prohibited terms — waiver of CPA rights void) — see
citations/statutes/CPA-2008.md - CPA s 55 (right to safe, good-quality goods) — same file
- CPA s 56 (implied warranty of quality) — same file
- CGSO Advisory Note 11 (voetstoots and the CPA) — see
citations/advisories/CGSO-Advisory-Note-11.md
Status
Operative facts and holding summarised verbatim-equivalent above. Full judgment text fillable from the NCT PDF on next refresh.