Investment CC t/a Kalema Tech & Hire v Metsi a Pula Fleet Management Agency (Pty) Ltd t/a Metsi a Pula Civil Plant Hire (C of A (CIV) No. 60 of 2015)

• Pages: 89-100
• DOI: 10.10520/EJC-bf59dc3af
• Published date: 01 January 2017
• Author: L. Matee
• Record Number: lesotho_v25_n1_a4
• Date: 01 January 2017

REVIEW OF APRIL 2016 SESSION OF COURT OF APPEAL

PROCEDURAL LAW AND PRACTICE

Matee L.⃰

INVESTMENT CC t/a KALEMA TECH & HIRE v METSI A PULA

FLEET MANAGEMENT AGENCY (PTY) LTD t/a METSI A PULA

CIVIL PLANT HIRE (C of A (CIV) No. 60/2015)

INTRODUCTION

The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Investment CC t/a

Kalema Tech & Hire v Metsi a Pula Fleet Management Agency (Pty) Ltd

t/a Metsi a Pula Civil Plant Hire has levelled a number of issues that

are normally argued in most cases, namely: appealability or

reviewability of interim orders, joinder of parties, urgent ex parte

applications, protection of incola against peregrinus litigants and

contempt of court. In most cases, practitioners normally argue these

issues as preliminary issues to be determined before a matter could

be decided on the merits.

However, at times, these issues are raised only as technicalities to

delay finality of a matter.

1

Having been decided upon by the apex

court of the land, one can only hope that practitioners will never

argue these issues as a way of delaying finality in litigation. This

article discusses these issues in light of the said decision of the

Court of Appeal. Before discussing these issues, it is important to

give a brief discussion of the factual background of Investment CC

⃰ Lecturer, National University of Lesotho. LL.B (NUL); LL.M (UKZN);

Lecturer, National University of Lesotho.

1

The Court in Sefikeng High School v Masupha CIV/APN/77/96

(unreported) held that a point in limine is meant to curtail proceedings and

save costs.