Legal position if a section 129(1)(a) notice in terms of the national credit act 34 of 2005 did not reach the mortgagor

The question arose as to what the legal position of the parties would be if a section 129(1)(a) notice in terms of the National Credit Act did not reach the mortgagor through one of the prescribed methods of delivery. Would the notice still be of effect? This question was fully examined in the leading Constitutional Court case of Sebola v Standard Bank Ltd.2 Prior to Sebola there had been uncertainty about the meaning of the term `delivery'. The run-up to Sebola is discussed briefly, and then the judgment in Sebola is discussed in detail. This judgment was followed by conflicting views in Nedbank Ltd v Binneman3 and ABSA Bank Ltd v Mkhize4 as well as ABSA Bank Ltd v Petersen5 which attempted to resolve the uncertainty in Sebola, and these views are examined and commented upon.