LML4807-Banking Law and Usage
LML4807-Banking Law and Usage
CASES
1. Transitional Local Council of Randfontein v ABSA Bank Ltd [2000] 2 All SA 134 (W) (11 pages)
2. Trust Bank of Africa Ltd v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd 1968 (3) SA 166 (A) (15 pages)
3. Rennie NO v the Master; Glaum NO v the Master 1980 (2) SA 600 (C) (10 pages)
4. Ex Parte Sapan Trading (Pty) Ltd 1995 (1) SA 218 (W) (6 pages)
5. Loomcraft Fabrics CC v Nedbank Ltd and another 1996 (1) SA 812 (A) (8 pages)
6. AA Farm Sales (Pty) Ltd (t/a AA Farms) v Kirkaldy 1980 (1) SA 13 (A) (7 pages)
7. Röntgen v Reichenberg 1984 (2) SA 181 (W) (4 pages)
8. Friedman v Blumenthal 1981 (2) SA 398 (W) (3 pages)
9. Davis v Braatvedt 1989 (3) SA 327 (N) (4 pages)
10. Cowen & Gering Cowen the Law of Negotiable Instruments (1985) 265-270 (4 pages)
11. Smith “Credit Cards and the Law” (1976) 39 THRHR 107-120 (8 pages)
12. Stassen “Paying by Credit Card” (1978) 8 Business Man’s Law 12-13 (2 pages)
13. Stassen “What happens when the card issuer does not pay?” (1978) 8 Business Man’s Law 35-37 (2 pages)
14. Stassen "Payment by credit card: Cash or credit? (1979) 8 Businessman's Law 183 (3 pages)
15. Re Charge Card Services [1988] 3 All ER 702 (5 pages)
16. Diners Club SA (Pty) Ltd v Singh and Another 2004 (3) SA 630 (D) (25 pages)
17. Cambanis Buildings (Pty) Ltd v Gal 1983 (2) SA 128 (NC) (6 pages)
18. Stassen "Legal nature of travellers' cheques" 1978 SALJ 180 (3 pages)
ACTS
The Banks Act 94 of 1990
National Credit Act 34 of 2005.
LML407-U 3
BANKING LAW AND USAGE
“If the trade usage is known to both parties their knowledge will be one of the surrounding circumstances indicating that
the trade usage ought to be incorporated in their contract as a term implied from the facts. The implication will not be
made by law but from the presumed common intention of the parties to include a term customarily included to the
knowledge of both of them”
“So universal and notorious that the party’s knowledge and intention to be bound by it can be presumed, Whether the
party professing ignorance has so conducted himself that the other party, on the principle of quasi-mutual assent, is
entitled to assume that he knew of the trade usage and intended to incorporate it tacitly into the contract”
Facts: the council and the bank had an arrangement in terms of which the bank would send an employee to the
council’s premises to count and verify cheques and cash intended to be deposited by the council into its account with
the bank. The teller issued, stamped and initialled deposit slips in respect of the amount tendered for the deposit. She
the put the cash into a bag sealed it and placed it in a safe on the council’s premises. She took the cheques with her. A
LML407-U 6
short while later the money was stolen from the safe. The council insisted that its account with the bank be credited
with the amount of the stolen money. The bank denied that the money was ever handed over to it, that it was thus
never deposited with it and argued that the loss of the money was for the account of the council. The bank argued that
a contract of depositum came into existence between them in terms of which it “deposited” the bag containing the
money with the council. In terms of this depositum the depository was liable for the custodia of the bag,
Legal issue: whether the bank, through the actions of its teller on the council’s premises, actually took possession of
the money thereby completing the deposit made by the council. The court held that the conduct of the teller constituted
the taking of a deposit by the bank and that the ownership of the money passed to the bank. One of the legal
ramifications of a contract of deposit is that once it was proved that there was such a contract and that the deposit had
been lost, the onus was on the depository to prove that this had occurred despite due diligence on its part. The court
then proceeded to make a factual evaluation of the facts before it and accept that in the present case the claim was
couched in delict terms. The bank therefore had to prove that the money was lost as a result of the council’s
negligence.
Objective test: the court confirmed that the action and omissions of the council had to be weighed against those of a
reasonable person n the same circumstances. The court decided that the council did not breach its duties under the
contract of deposit and the counter-claim of the bank was accordingly dismissed. The bank was accordingly ordered to
pay the sum of the stolen cash
Savings deposits
- The repealed banks act 23 of 1965 contained a definition of a savings account, and also contained certain
restrictions on savings accounts
- Withdrawals from a savings account were subject to 31days prior notice, however the bank was free to waiver
the notice period
- A withdrawal could only be paid out to the depositor personally or be transferred to another account held by
him, his spouse or dependant at the bank concerned
- If the account holder was a company, only one withdrawal could be made a month and each deposit or
withdrawal had to amount to at least R100.
- Maximum credit balance at a specific bank was R100 000
ATM
LML407-U 8
- The machine can be given instructions e.g. To pay out an amount in cash, to transfer an amount from one account
to another, to accept a deposit
- The question is whether the customer may be debited with the amount of such an unauthorised withdrawal.
- Usually this risk issue will not arise because most financial institutions conclude an express contract with their
customers in this regard. The agreement provides that the customers account may be debited with all withdrawals
made by means of the particular card and accompanying secret number. Only if the bank is notified of a possible
unauthorised withdrawal before it takes place will the customer not have to accept a debit.
- Possible tacit term that the customer would carry the risk of an unauthorised withdrawal
- The surrounding circumstances, which exist on conclusion of the contract, play an important role when the court
has to determine the intention of the parties.
ATM deposits
- The transaction slip supplied by the machine has no evidential value, because it is simply a record of what the
customer has keyed into the machine.
- A question that may be important is whether the payment takes place when the deposit amount is inserted into the
machine, or only when the deposit envelope is opened and its contents are accepted by the bank.
- With a cheque it is clear that payment only takes place when the cheque is honoured.
- When cash is deposited into an atm. It seems that payment of such amount takes place only when the contents of
the envelope are removed by the bank official.
- If this view is correct, only a contract of deposit (depositum) exists while the envelope is in the autoteller.
- As banks receive amounts on loan, it is better to regard it as deposit for reward.
Open Account
The goods are shipped and payment takes place at a later stage.
The seller has to bear the burden of financing the sale as well as the risk of non-payment or late payment of the
buyer.
Sale on consignment
The goods are shipped prior to payment of the purchase price, but the seller retains ownership of the goods until
such time as they are sold by the buyer to a 3rd party, at which time the buyer is expected to pay the seller
The seller has to shoulder the burden of financing the sale until the goods have been sold, runs the risk of non-
payment or late payment should the buyer commit breach of contract.
The contract of purchase is concluded to bring about the simultaneous transfer and payment of the purchase price
A letter of intent would be unacceptable if it is stipulated that proof of registration of transport should be provided by
someone other that the conveyance who dealt with the transfer
The mortgagor cannot demand cancellation of the bond against delivery of a letter of undertaking for the
outstanding amount, unless that has been so agreed
LML407-U 16
Davis v Braatvedt
It is argued that it has become practise to associate the right to resile with the registration of a mortgage bond. If
the right to resile where linked to the transport of property only, it would be have been acceptable. However the
court did not decide on this point
The parties agreed to payment on registration rather than payment of registration of a mortgage bond
The court indicated that the seller has no control over the registration of a mortgage bond and there could be
various reasons why is could not be registered or why it might be delayed,
The seller has not yet got what he required, namely the undertaking is obtained alter than was agreed.
The buyer was entitled to refuse the undertaking received via the buyer
The seller has the right to reject a conditional undertaking, unless there has been specific agreement on a
limitation to that effect.
Possible that is became a trade usage to have such a condition
In Roman law the obligation between the delegate and the delegatory could only be created by stipulation.
No naturalia developed in respect of this obligation, in contrast with consensual and real contracts
Regulated by the express terms in their written contract and the tacit terms that can be deduced from the
circumstances.
No particular trade usage influencing the relationship has yet developed
The relationship between the credit card holder and the supplier
The intention of the parties is that the supplies will receive payment from the card issuer and that the card holder
will not be liable for payment to the supplier, provided that the supplier is paid by the card issued. The liability of the
card holder toward the supplier is suspended.
What happens when the issuer does not pay the supplier? The suspension of the card holders liability ceases and
the card holder becomes directly liable to the supplier
Where the card holder has paid the issuer, but the issuer cannot or will not pay the supplier? It would appear that
the card holder will remain liable toward the supplier and that the card holders will have to fork out payment for a
second time. Unfair toward the card holder, especially because the supplier had contracted with the issuer in the
first place if on the grounds of the issuer’s financial standing.
The English decision in Re Charge card services Ltd dealt with this very question. The curt decided that in tri-party
credit scheme, the suppler accepts payment by card in substitution for payment in cash as an unconditional
discharge of the price. This construction entails that payment by credit card was an absolute, not a conditional,
discharge of the card holders liability toward the supplier
LML407-U 17
STUDY UNIT 9- Other payment mechanisms
Stop orders
Is a payment mechanism employed in conjunction with a current or transmission account
Contains a written instruction from the account holder to the bank to pay a fixed amount on a regular basis to a
specified 3rd party and to debit the customer’s account with the amount
The legal relationship between the bank and the account holder is founded on mandatum, and the obligation of the
bank is that of a mandatory
The banks obligations to perform the payment instruction is subject to the condition that there are specific funds to
the credit of the account against which the paid amount may be set off, or that an agreement on payment by the
customer has been made
A cheque reaches the bank indirectly via the creditor, a stop order is handed directly to the bank by the debtor
The creditor does not derive rights from the stop order
The creditor in favour of whom the stop order is made out usually obtains no rights against the bank or the
debtor/account holder who has given the stop order, since it results in an obligation between the bank and the
account holder only. As a result the account holder may revoke his or her instruction at anytime by cancelling the
stop order and the creditor cannot legally object (Cambanis
Buildings (Pty) Ltd v Gal )
This decision was confirmed in Consolidated frame cotton
Corporation Ltd v Sithole and others- the court indicated that a
creditor may obtain rights against the bank if it is the intention of
the bank and the account holder to create a stipulation in favour of
a third party (the creditor), and if the creditor accepts the stipulation
in his or her favour.
In the case of a cheque the account holder can also revoke the
payment instruction contained in the cheque by countermanding
payment, that is by instructing the bank not to pay the cheque
S53(1)(a) of the BEA the drawer, by drawing a cheque, undertakes
that the cheque will be paid when duly presented for payment, and
that he or she will compensate the holder if it is dishonoured. Even
if the drawer should revoke his or her payment instruction to the
bank, the payee will retain the claim on the cheque as a liquid
document
Debit orders
A debit order is used by an account holder to effect regular payments
to a 3rd party via the account holder’s bank. It differs from the stop
order in that the completed debit-order form is handed to the creditor
to request the amount from the bank, apart from an authorisation to
the bank to pay the amount to the creditor
The ordinary debit order: is a form in which the account holders
requests the 3rd party to make periodic withdrawals from his bank
account, and directs the bank to debit that account with these
withdrawals
Transfer of the amount takes place by means of a mail-transfer slip
which the debtor’s bank makes out in favour of the creditor/beneficiary.
Multi-data debit orders: the company multi-data (pty) Ltd undertakes to prepare debit slips and mail-transfer slips
on behalf of firms participating in the system, and to send these to the bank. The debtor: requests multi-data to
withdraw the amounts requested; requests the bank to debit his account with the amounts drawn on it by multi-
data; requests the creditor to ask multi-data for the amounts for collection from his bank
LML407-U 18
Multi-data mails the debit slips and mail-transfer slips in respect of accounts held at every bank branch to that
branch. The creditor/beneficiaries receive payment from multi-data
Manumatic debits: the Manumatic system was founded by the South African clearance banks. A company must
first apply to one of the banks to become a user of the system.
If the application is approved, such a company may pass debits against cheques and transmission accounts held
with any of these clearance banks. However, it must give indemnity against liability to all the banks concerned,
which has to be covered by an indemnity of the bank that approved its application.
It must also open a special Manumatic deposit amount with the surety bank in which all amounts collected through
the system are credited.
A creditor who is a user of the Manumatic system will have his or her debtor complete and sign a debit instruction
in which the debtor requests the creditor to withdraw specified amounts from his or her bank account in any way
agreed upon between the creditor and the bank.
The debit instruction form is handed directly to the creditor and the bank does not receive a copy.
ACB Magnetic tape debits: the Manumatic system is available only to companies handling less than 1000 entries
per month. As soon as this limit is exceeded, the company has to change to the ACB Manumatic system by means
of which its regular debits are processed electronically.
The most important difference between the stop order and the debit order is that the latter entails not only a
payment mandate from the account holder to his or her bank, but also an authorisation to the creditor to request
the amount from the bank.
There is consensus between the creditor and the debtor that the creditor will first request the payment through the
debit-order system concerned. The creditors right to payment is suspended until he or she has made the
necessary request
It must be borne in mind that the creditor accepts the authorisation contained in the debit order form. He or she
should not be able to rely on late payment by the debtor where the fact that he or she is credited later that the
specified date results from delays in the inherent system.
By accepting the request of the debtor, the creditor agrees to the date on which the debtors account will be
debited, and by implication gives a grace period for the time that may pass between such debiting and the crediting
of his or her account
This principle was confirmed in Penderis and Gutman NNO v Liquidators, short-term Business, AA Mutual
Insurance association Ltd. - the court reasoned that the dishonour in the present case was not as a result of lack of
funds, but because of the banks wrongful action of prematurely “freezing” the appellant’s overdraft facility. The
court held that there was no reason to believe that the insurer (who had been the scribe of the insurance contract)
had not intended to bear risks inherent in the system of payment by way of debit order, particularly since it had
insisted that the payment be paid by debit order.
Bills of Exchange
Bills of exchange may be used in a variety of ways to fulfil payment and/r finance function. A bank acts as a
payment intermediary when it pays a bill drawn on it to the holder. The bank may merely be a drawee, which has
no obligation to pay the payee or later holder, or it can become an acceptor by appending its signature to the bill
(cheque account holder) at a bank, there exists a tacit agreement in terms of which the bank is obliged to pay his
or her cheques up to the amount of the credit balance of the account. This tacit agreement, does not however,
LML407-U 19
include an obligation that the bank has to pay other bills of exchange drawn by the drawer. Neither is there any
similar trade usage regarding other account holders.
The bill as an order to the bank constitutes an offer, which is accepted by the bank. The result is a contract of
mandate with regard to that specific bill. The bank will only do this if it holds deposits by the client that can be set
off against the payment, or the if the bank is otherwise satisfied that the client will reimburse it
Traveller’s cheques
Traveller’s cheques are used to eliminate the risk of theft or loss of cash when travelling overseas
In S v Katsikaris the appellate division decided that a traveller’s cheque that makes an order to pay subject to the
appending of a countersignature does not meet the requirement of unconditionality, and therefore does not qualify
as a cheque or bill or exchange. This judgement only applies to a particular type of traveller’s cheques (American
express) and that other traveller’s cheques, which are not made conditional in the same way, therefore do qualify
as cheques, bills or promissory notes.
The effect of this judgement regarding the question whether the particular type of traveller’s cheque is a cheque or
bill still remains, and it must therefore be accepted that such a traveller’s cheque is not regulated by the bill of
exchange act.
The remaining question is whether such a travellers cheque is a bill of exchange according to the common-law;
belongs to a new category of negotiable instruments, which has originated through customary law; is not a
negotiable instrument at all, with the result that the relationship between the parties are governed solely by
agreement ( non-novatory delegation)
Size of agreements
Small agreements: pawn transaction of any amount or a credit facility or credit transaction where the credit limit or
principal debt falls below R15 000
Intermediate agreements: credit facilities of more than R15 000; credit transaction ( except credit guarantee, pawn
transactions or mortgage agreement) more than r15000 but less than R250 000
Large agreement: credit transaction above R250 000; mortgage bonds
In the case of a small agreement the credit provider must, at the request of the consumer, enter into the
contemplated credit agreement at or below the interest rate or credit cost quoted, subject only to certain
exemptions
Intermediate agreements, enter into the contemplated credit agreement at an interest rate or cost that:
is at or below the interest rate or credit cost quoted, or
is higher than the interest rate or cost quoted but NOT greater than the difference between the prevailing bank
rates on the date of the quote, and the date the agreement is made
Form
The National Credit Act neither expressly declares a credit agreement which is not reduced to writing void, nor
creates it as an offence. However, does envisage that credit agreements will be in writing and signed by the
consumer.
Failure by the credit provider to provide the consumer with a copy of the documents (i.e. the agreement) is an
offence and repeated failures to furnish copies of agreements may lead to deregistration of a credit provider.
the mere fact that a credit agreement is not reduced to writing will not invalidate it, but if the agreement is not in
writing the credit provider will not be able to fulfil its obligation to render “a copy of the documents to the consumer”
--- and failure to do that does constitute an offence on the part of the credit provider.
Disclosure is critically important for encouraging price competition.
Liability for lost or stolen cards
The Act confirms the trade usage and standard terms encountered in most bank-client agreements regarding the
question which party bears the liability for lost or stolen cards.
It provides that the consumer will not be liable for the use of a card associated with a credit facility (eg a credit
card) after the consumer has informed the credit provider of the loss of the card or PIN, unless the credit provider
can prove that the consumer acted fraudulently
Initiation fee: a fee in respect of costs of initiating a credit agreement and is:
Charged to the consumer by the credit provider, or
Paid to the credit provider by the consumer upon entering into the credit agreement
A service fee: a fee that may be charged periodically by a credit provider in connection with the routine
administration cost of maintaining a credit agreement. (Maximum monthly service fee of R50, 00 for a credit
agreement)
LML407-U 27
Collection costs: an amount that may be charged by a credit provider in respect of enforcement of a consumer’s
monetary obligations under a credit agreement, but does not include a default administration charge.
Otto in the National Credit Act Explained that “conspicuously absent from the list above are the registration costs
connected with a mortgage bond”. He further suggests that the only way in which such registration costs can be
brought within the ambit of the Act’s provisions is to give a very wide meaning to the words “registration fee” in the
phrase “taxes, license or registration fees”.
Fees:
If a credit agreement is an installment agreement, a mortgage agreement, a secured loan or a lease, the credit
provider may include in the amount of the principal debt any of the following items to the extent that they are
applicable
an initiation fee
the cost of an extended warranty agreement
Delivery, installation and initial fuelling charges)
Connection fees, levies or charges, or
the premiums under a credit insurance policy
Interest:
In terms of the regulations the maximum “interest rate” which can be charged for a credit agreement is calculated
according to a certain formula. In terms of this formula the maximum interest rate is determined by multiplying the
ruling Reserve Bank Repurchase Rate (“RR”), as at the time when the credit agreement was entered into, by a
factor of 2,2 plus a certain percentage.
Change in interest rate:
The general rule is that the credit provider is not allowed to unilaterally increase the periodic or incidental service
fees, or the method of calculating such fees.
The Act provides for certain exceptions to this general rule:
1. If the interest rate in respect of a credit agreement with a fixed interest rate is to be changed by the credit
provider, it must give the consumer written notice of at least five business days. This notice must be given
before the interest is changed.
2. the credit provider is not allowed to unilaterally increase the rate of interest applicable to a credit agreement,
except where the contract itself provides for a variable interest rate, in which case the credit provider must give
written notice to the consumer, not later than 30 business days after the day on which a change in the variable
interest rate takes effect. In the case of a credit agreement with a variable interest rate, therefore, the credit
provider does not need to give notice beforehand of an increase in the interest rate; but notice must be given
not later than 30 days after the increase has taken effect.
3. we need to point out that the agreement may only provide for a rate to vary in future if the variation is by fixed
relationship to a reference rate
credit insurance:
Credit provider may require the consumer to obtain and maintain credit life insurance or cover to provide for cover
against the total of the consumer’s outstanding obligations to the credit provider in terms of their agreement.
The credit provider may also offer an optional insurance option
Statements of account:
Generally the maximum period allowed between statements is one month
Two months in respect of an installment agreement, lease or secured loan; and it is six months in respect of a
mortgage loan. the credit provider must, free of charge and at the consumer’s request, provide the consumer with
a statement of all or any of the following:
the current balance of the consumer’s account
any amounts credited or debited during a period specified in the request
any amounts currently overdue and when such amount became due
any amount currently payable and the date it became due
The statement must be provided within 10 days of it having been requested if the information requested relates to
a period of one year of less prior to the date upon which the request is made.
Alteration of credit agreement
Alterations made to a credit agreement after it has been signed are void, unless:
The change reduces the consumer’s liability, or
The consumer ratifies the change by either signing or initialling opposite the change, or
The parties have agreed to alter the terms of a credit agreement and have done so in writing
A consumer may at any time by written notice to the credit provider request that the credit limit under his or her
facility be reduced and may stipulate a maximum credit limit.
LML407-U 28
A credit provider may not increase a credit limit unless it is only temporarily or if the consumer agrees to it orally or
in writing.
Before increasing a credit limit, the credit provider must complete a fresh assessment of the consumer’s ability to
meet the obligations that could arise under such increased credit liability.
In terms of the repealed banks act, it was the “business of taking deposits” that was prohibited without registration
as a bank
The courts decided that it (deposits) refers to contracts of loan of money for consumption, as it was not defined in
that act
One is only dealing with a contract of money lending if the amount borrowed is to be repaid unconditionally
The prohibition in the repealed banks act of 1965 was also only applicable if a person conducted the taking of
deposits as a business (S v Rosenthal)
The banks act prohibits the conducting of “the business of a bank” without registration
The activities of such a practice which are declared as the business of a bank which are the acceptance of money,
directly or indirectly, from members of the public, as a regular feature of a business practise, with the prospect of
such members receiving payments or other money-related benefits directly or indirectly-
a) On or after the introduction of other members of the public to the business practice, from which new
participating members, in their turn, money is accepted or obtained, directly or indirectly as a regular feature of
the business whether or not- “
I. The introduction of the new participating members is limited to their introduction by participating
members or extends to the introduction of the new participating members by other persons; or
II. New participating members are required to acquire moveable or immovable property, rights or services;
b) On or after the promotions, transfer or change of status of the participating members or new participating
members in terms of the business practice”
The activities of soliciting, or advertising, directly or indirectly for money and/or persons for introduction into or
participation in such a business practice are also declared to be the business of a bank
Amendment of the definitions: s1(2) on the recommendation of the registrar, after consultation with the governor of the
reserve bank, the minister may amend the definition of “deposit” or “ the business of a bank” by regulation in the
gazette
Registration of banks
S11(1) prohibits an unregistered person from performing the business of a bank
LML407-U 34
S22(4) no person, in connection with any business, may use any name, description or symbol indicating or
calculated to lead persons to infer that he or she is a registered bank unless in fact so registered
S22(5) no person may use in respect of any business a name or description that includes the word “bank”, or any
derivative, or the words “building society”, or any derivative, or the words “deposit-taking institution, or any
derivative unless:
1) The business in question is a registered bank or has an authorisation under S18A
2) The business in question is registered as a controlling company in respect of a registered bank and the name
is so used for the purpose of indicating the connection between the 2, or
3) Such name is composed of words that include the word “bank” as part of a place or personal name
Under S22 (5) the registrar’s written authorisation must first be obtained for the use of the name. however when
the registrar grants an application for registration as a bank, or registers a controlling company under S44, it stands
to reason that he or she also grants approval for the use of the name under which the company in question was
incorporated in terms of the companies act
S13 (2) the registrar must be satisfied concerning certain aspects before granting an application for the
authorisation. The most important are:
That the establishment of the proposed bank will be in the public interest
That the proposed business of a bank will be conducted in the capacity of a public company incorporated
under the companies act
That the applicant will be able to establish itself successfully as a bank
That the applicant will have the financial means to comply with the financial requirements of the banks act
That the proposed business as a bank will be conducted in a prudent manner
That every person who is to be an executive officer of the proposed bank has sufficient experience of the
management of the kind of business it is intended to conduct
That every person who in to be director or an executive officer of the proposed bank is, as far as can
reasonably by ascertained, a fit and proper person to hold the office of such director or executive officer
If the authorisation is granted the applicant may, at any time within 12 months apply for registration as a bank
S16(10
If registration is granted, it does not mean that the bank may now immediately do everything that a registered bank
may do.
S17(5) an institution that is registered as a bank for the first time, may not commence the business of a bank until it
has furnished proof to the registrar that it complied with the provisions of S70. This provision deals with the
minimum share capital and unimpaired reserve funds that must be maintained by banks. The registrar may subject
a registration to conditions
The registrar may allows a bank to use the name by which it was previously registered, or the name of another bank
with which it has amalgamated or all the assets and liabilities of which have been transferred to it, in conjunction with
its registered name
No change of the name of a bank (or any alteration of the memorandum of association or articles of association) shall
have any legal force, unless it has previously been approved in writing by the registrar
The registrar may only exercise this discretion with the consent of the minister.
S24: the bank has to be granted 30 days time to show reason why registration should not be cancelled
2 cases when the registrar must cancel registration: upon submission by the bank of a special resolution
authorising such cancellation and upon receipt of the master’s certificate in terms of S419(1) of the Companies act
that the liquidation of a bank has been completed
The court has a general power to order cancellation and is not limited to specific grounds. S25 (4) names a number of
grounds that the court may consider sufficient, without curtailing its general discretion:
1. if the bank or any of its directors or executive officers has been convicted f any offence in terms of the act
2. if the bank does not satisfactorily perform the business of a bank registrar of banks v trans Africa Credit and
Savings bank ltd
3. if the bank has failed to comply with a requirement of the act that is applicable to it in its capacity as a registered
bank
4. if the bank continues to employ an undesirable practise
5. if the bank has in a material respect misrepresented the facilities that it offers to the public
an “undesirable practise” means any act or failure prohibited by S78(1) or prohibit by the registrar in terms of S78(2)-
the registrar may by notice of the Gazette declare any practice to be an undesirable practice for banks specified in that
notice or all banks
S78 (1) 10 acts or omissions that are listed as automatically undesirable practices: (9 and 10 make no sense):
1. The holding of shares in a company of which the bank is a subsidiary. Permits primarily to those cases of
shareholding by a subsidiary in its holding company that is permitted by way of exception S39 of the
companies act.
2. the lending of money against security of its own shares
3. the granting of unsecured loans or loans against security which in the opinion of the registrar is inadequate, for
the purpose of furthering the sale of its own shares. Must be read together with S38(2)(a) of the companies
act: a company cannot give financial assistance in respect of the purchase of its shares by another person,
exception to this is in favour of a company whose main business is the lending of money
4. barring certain exceptions, the holding of assets of the bank in the name of another person
5. the showing in its financial statements or in a return as an asset, any amount presenting the cost of
organisation or extension or the purchase of a business, loss or bad debts
6. the opening of a new branch or agency, or the paying of dividends on its shares before provision has been
made out of profits for the items referred to above
7. the performance of any act in the capacity of an agent for the purpose of effecting a money lending transaction
between two persons, unless certain requirements are met
8. the recording of an asset in its financial statement at a value increased by the amount of a loss incurred upon
the realisation of another asset
a bank that employs any on these undesirable practices or continues to employ such a practice, after the expiry of 21
days from the dates that a specified practice was declared to be undesirable practice by the registrar is guilty of an
offence and punishable by fine R10 000
LML407-U 36
Lapse of registration
When the registration has been cancelled in terms of S23 by the registrar, in which case registration lapses after
expiry of the 30 days notice of cancellation. If an appeal was lodged with the appeal board and they confirmed the
cancellation then registration lapses on the date of the confirmation of the cancellation. When the registration has
been cancelled in terms of S25 by the court, then registration lapses on the date the court order comes into force
In the case of a registration cancelled by the registrar in terms of S27 or 28 the registration lapses upon the date
determined by the registrar
The registrar may order the institution to repay, in accordance with such directions and within such period as may
be specified in the order, all the money due by it to its members of the public in respect of deposit’s accepted by it
while registered as a bank, including any interest or any other amount owing by it in respect of such money
For the purpose of s344 and 345 of the companies act, the institution would then be deemed unable to pay its
debts. The result of this is that the institution is placed in liquidation on application of anyone who qualifies to bring
such an application
STUDY UNIT 13- money laundering control and legislation in relation to banks
At present, money laundering prevention constitutes one of the key activities of financial institutions in general, and of
banks in particular.
The 1998 Act repealed both the 1992 Act and the 1996
The importance of the 1998 Act is threefold. The 1998 Act:
o Defines key concepts as regards money laundering, which definitions are referred to by FICA
o Extends the definition of proceeds of unlawful activities
o Creates various money laundering offences
Section 1 definitions:
Unlawful activity-conduct which constitutes a crime either in South Africa or elsewhere.
LML407-U 37
Proceeds of unlawful activity (commonly referred to as “proceeds of crime”) - any property, service, advantage,
benefit, or reward which was derived, received, or retained, either directly or indirectly in South Africa or abroad, in
connection with any unlawful activity carried on by a person.
Property- money or any other movable, immovable, corporeal or incorporeal thing. Rights, privileges, claims,
securities and any interest in, and all proceeds of, such property are also included in the definition.
Instrumentality of crime: property utilised in the commission, or suspected commission of an offence
Money laundering offences: 2 categories of money laundering offences:
1. offences which involve the proceeds of all forms of unlawful activity
2. offences which involve proceeds of a pattern of racketeering activities
a “pattern of planned racketeering” is any planned or ongoing participation or involvement in any of the offences
listed in Schedule 1, some of the offences include corruption, fraud, perjury and theft
a person commits a money laundering offence when proceeds of a pattern of racketeering activity are invested in
an enterprise with a view to facilitating either of the outcomes in S4-6 of the act
3main money laundering offences which are contained in s4-6 of the 1998 act. These defences can be committed
only in relation to the “proceeds of unlawful activities”
S4: a person who knows or ought reasonably to have known that property is proceeds of unlawful activities is guilty
of a money laundering offence if he or she:
Enters into any agreement, or engages in transaction with anyone in connection with that property, whether
such agreement or transaction is legally enforceable or not, or
Performs any other act in connection with such property, whether it is performed independently or in concert
with any other person, which has one of the following two outcomes:
o concealing the nature, source, location, disposition or movement of the said property, its ownership, or
any interest which anyone may have in respect thereof, or
o enabling or assisting any person who has committed or commits an offence, whether in South Africa or
elsewhere for the purpose of:
o Either avoiding prosecution or removing property acquired as a result of the commission of an
offence.
S5: a person is guilty of an offence if he or she knows or ought reasonably to have known that another person has
obtained the proceeds of an unlawful activity and enters into an agreement or transaction which facilitates:
• Retention or control by or on behalf of that person of the said proceeds
• Utilization of such proceeds so to make funds available to the other person, or
• Acquisition of property on behalf of the person or to his or her benefit.
S6: criminalises any acquisition, use, or possession of property by a person who knows, or ought reasonably to
have known, that it constitutes the proceeds of the unlawful activity committed by another person
Knowledge of a person as regards the fact that the property constitutes proceeds of an unlawful activity constitutes
a key factor if liability is to be established. a person will be regarded to have knowledge of a fact if:
The person was actually aware of the fact, or
The court finds the person knew there was a reasonable possibility that a fact existed, yet failed to investigate
the matter so as to confirm or disprove its existence
Whether it is possible to commit a money laundering offence negligently? Yes! Any person who assists another to
conclude transactions which launder proceeds of crime will be guilty of committing a money laundering offence.
This is because of the “ought to have known or suspected” part of sections 4 to 6 of the act.
A person accused of committing a money laundering offence will be unable to rely on arguing that he or she was
unaware of the purpose of the transaction which he or she concluded.
Banks have the pivotal obligation to ensure that their employees know and understand the provisions of anti-
money laundering legislation. Failure to heed this obligation is criminalised by FICA.
The 1998 Act describes in detail which factors can be considered to establish negligence by a person. Accordingly,
a person acts negligently if he or she fails to recognise or suspect a fact which may reasonably be expected of a
person with the general knowledge, skill, training, and experience in his or her position, and the knowledge, skill,
training, and experience that he or she in actual fact has.
A person convicted of a money laundering offence may be fined to an amount not exceeding
R100 million, or a maximum of 30 years’ imprisonment. The confiscation, after conviction, of property “which forms
the benefit derived” from the offence or related offences.
Civil forfeiture: As regards civil forfeiture, the Preamble to the 1998 Act provides as follows: [As] the South African
common law and statutory law fail to deal effectively with ... [crime] ... Legislation is necessary to provide for a civil
remedy for the restraint and seizure, and confiscation of property which forms the benefits derived from such
offence; and whereas no person should benefit from the fruits of unlawful activities, nor is any person entitled to
use property for the commission of an offence ... legislation is necessary to provide for a civil remedy for the
LML407-U 38
preservation and seizure, and forfeiture of property which is derived from unlawful activities or is concerned in the
commission or suspected commission of an offence ....
Chapter 5 and 6 of the act provide for a civil remedy for the preservation and forfeiture of property when it appears
that the property is either the proceeds of unlawful activities, or was an instrumentality in an offence.
Any question of fact is adjudicated on a balance of probabilities.
2 types of asset forfeitures:
Forfeiture of a benefit which the accused may have derived from an offence after conviction was obtained
(Chapter 5)
Forfeiture of property which is either an instrumentality of an offence, or proceeds of unlawful activities without
obtaining any conviction (Chapter 6)
A confiscation order may be made after an accused has been convicted of an offence. Forfeiture that follows a
conviction is known as criminal forfeiture.
If the court finds the accused has benefited from involvement in criminal activity, it may order him or her to pay to
the State an amount which does not exceed the value of the proceeds derived from the offence.
No conviction of an accused is required for property to be forfeited. Instead, the State must prove on a balance of
probabilities that the property is an instrumentality of an offence or the proceeds of unlawful activities
The State must give notice to all persons who may have an interest in the property. A person who applies for the
exclusion of his or her interest in the property must establish on a balance of probabilities that he or she:
Acquired the interest legally
Neither knew nor had reasonable grounds to suspect that the property was the proceeds of or an
instrumentality in crime.
Consider the intention of the phrase “in connection with” in the definition of “instrumentalities of an offence”. How
does it contribute to the definition of proceeds of unlawful activities? The court said the following:
[T]he words “concerned in the commission of an offence”, must in our view be interpreted so that the link
between the crime committed and the property is reasonably direct, and that the employment of the property
must be functional to the commission of the crime. By this we mean that the property must play a reasonably
direct role in the commission of the offence. In a real or substantial sense the property must facilitate or make
possible the commission of the offence ... the property must be instrumental in, and not merely incidental to,
the commission of the offence. For otherwise there is no rational connection between the deprivation of
property and the objective of the Act.
FICA is a progressive statute built upon the experience of other countries, e.g. England and the United States, in
dealing with money laundering.
Training obligation
S43: requires that accountable institutions provide sufficient raining to employees to enable them to
comply with FICA’s provisions and the institutions internal money laundering rules
Failure by an accountable institution to provide sufficient training to employees is an offence in terms of
FICA
An employee who was inadequately trained may use such an omission as a defence against a charge in
terms of FICA. The reason is that an employee of an accountable institution who fails to report
suspicious or unusual transactions commits an offence.
S69: an employee who failed to file a S29 report may use as defence the fact that his or her employer
neglected to train him or her to recognise and handle suspected money laundering activities
Offences
The obligations imposed by the statute. Some of these offences include:
1. Failure to identify clients or to keep records
2. Failure to provide assistance to the Centre or to disclose information to it on request
3. failure to report to the Centre cash transactions above the threshold amount, a suspicious or unusual
transaction and conveyance of cash above the threshold amount in or out of South Africa
4. Unauthorised disclosure of information in relation to a report filed on a suspicious or unusual transaction
5. Failure to send the Centre a report on the conveyance of cash to the Centre
6. Failure to report to the Centre electronic transfers in excess of the threshold amount
7. Failure to comply with a request made by the Centre, or to suspend a transaction
8. Failure to formulate and implement internal rules, or to make a copy available to employees
9. Failure to provide training to employees or to appoint a compliance officer
Defences (S69)
FICA provides only 1 defence for failure to heed its provisions
A person charged under S52( failure to report a suspicious or unusual transaction) may argue
successfully that he or she was ignorant of the fact that a client engaged in a money laundering activity,
and therefore failed to report the suspicious or unusual transaction.
This defence is available only to an employee, director, or trustee of an accountable institution who is
charge under S52. such a person may raise as defence the fact that he or she:
Complied with the institutions internal rules relating to reportable transactions
Reported the transaction to the compliance officer, or
Report the transaction to his or her superior either because the institution failed to employ a
compliance officer, or because its internal rules were not made available to him or her, as a result of
which he or she was ignorant of the nature of the transaction and/or the procedure to follow
Use of the S69 defence may, however, render an accountable institution criminally liable for failure to
make its internal money laundering rules available to employees, trustees, or directors, and for failure to
provide the necessary training as required under S43 of FICA.
Other legislation
The Financial Advisory and Intermediary services act 37 of 2002
Pertains to the business of rendering financial advice to clients about financial products.
The FAIS has a wide ambit because it generally applies where a business unit, as part of its business,
provides financial advice, or an intermediary service on financial products which are listed in the statute.
Under the FAIS, financial advice includes any recommendation, guidance, or proposal of a financial
nature which pertains to the purchase or variation of, or investment in, a financial product.
Financial product: includes, among other things, any deposit as defined in the Banks Act which is for a
period of more than 12 months.
Deposits made for a period of less than 12 months are regulated by a specific code published in 2004:
the Code of Conduct for Authorised Financial Services Providers and Representatives Conducting Short
Term Deposit Business
S7 for the most part deals with the authorisation of financial services providers.
The FAIS imposes various obligations on authorised financial service providers. For example:
o A financial service provider, for example a bank, with one or more individuals, must employ a
compliance officer to monitor its compliance with the FAIS (s 17).
o A financial service provider must preserve records pertaining, among other things, to the cancellation
of transactions by clients, its financial statements, and money and assets held on behalf of clients
(ss 18 and 19).
The General Code of Conduct for Authorised Financial Services Providers and Representatives. The
Deposit Code regulates short-term deposit taking. This is where a financial service provider offers a
financial service for deposits defined in terms of the Banks Act which does not exceed a period of 12
months. It follows therefore that the Deposit Code applies specifically to banks
The Deposit Code imposes various obligations on banks in respect of compliance (see reg 6). Banks
must for example: comply with the Deposit Code, maintain internal complaint policies, make the Deposit
Code available to clients on request and provide detailed information to a client pertaining to a financial
product including applicable contractual terms, operation of the account, applicable fees and notification
Financial Services Ombud Schemes act 37 of 2004
LML407-U Claire Daly 47
o Deals with consumer complaints pertaining to financial services providers. The Banking Ombudsman is
a voluntary scheme among banks in terms of the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Act of 2004.
o Any bank who is a member of the Banking Association of South Africa is bound by the provisions of this
statute.
Protection of Constitutional Democracy against terrorist and related activities act 33 of 2004
An undeniable nexus has been found to exist between money laundering and terrorism
Enacted for two main reasons:
1. To criminalise terrorism and related offences and
2. To provide for measures aimed at the prevention and combating of terrorist and related activities.
The Terrorist Act criminalises not only terrorism itself but also actions by individuals designed to
assist or further terrorist activities.
Offences listed in S4 (1) of the Terrorist Act. Accordingly, if there is an intent that any property, financial
service, or if economic support is used (or a person knows or ought reasonably to have known or
suspected that the property, financial service, or economic support will be used) for the following
purposes: to commit a specified offence, on behalf of an entity which aims to commit a specified offence,
for the benefit of a specified entity
It is then an offence for a bank to:
Provide or make available any financial or other service
Provide or make available any economic support
Facilitate the acquisition, collection or to provide property, a financial or any other service, or
economic support.
It is furthermore an offence for a bank to deal with property which it knows or reasonably ought to have
known or suspected to have been acquired to commit a specified offence
A possible penalty of 15 imprisonment or R100 000mil fine