'Mampolokeng Matela V Democratic Gongress & 6 Others (C of A (CIV) 57/2025) [2025] LSCA 79 (7 November 2025)

# 'Mampolokeng Matela V Democratic Gongress & 6 Others (C of A (CIV) 57/2025) [2025] LSCA 79 (7 November 2025) [ __](https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](mailto:?subject=Take a look at this document from LesLII: 'Mampolokeng Matela V Democratic Gongress & 6 …&body=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07) [ Download PDF (178.1 KB) ](/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07/source) Report a problem __ * Share * [ Download PDF (178.1 KB) ](/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/79/eng@2025-11-07/source) * * * * * Report a problem __ ##### 'Mampolokeng Matela V Democratic Gongress & 6 Others (C of A (CIV) 57/2025) [2025] LSCA 79 (7 November 2025) Copy citation * __Document detail * __Related documents Citation 'Mampolokeng Matela V Democratic Gongress & 6 Others (C of A (CIV) 57/2025) [2025] LSCA 79 (7 November 2025) Copy Media Neutral Citation [2025] LSCA 79 Copy Hearing date 8 October 2025 Court [Court of Appeal](/judgments/LSCA/) Case number C of A (CIV) 57/2025 Judges [Dr. Mosito P](/judgments/all/?judges=Dr.%20Mosito%20P), [Sakoane CJ](/judgments/all/?judges=Sakoane%20CJ), [Van der Westhuizen AJA](/judgments/all/?judges=Van%20der%20Westhuizen%20AJA) Judgment date 7 November 2025 Language English ##### __Collections * [Case indexes](/taxonomy/case-indexes) * [Commercial](/taxonomy/case-indexes/case-indexes-commercial) * [Civil Procedure](/taxonomy/case-indexes/case-indexes-commercial-civil-procedure) Summary ###### Flynote Civil Procedure — Rule nisi — Discharge — Effect — Jurisdiction — Whether proceedings may continue after discharge of rule nisi — Discharge of rule nisi terminates proceedings — Subsequent “judgment” a nullity. Read full summary * * * Skip to document content ###### Flynote Civil Procedure — Rule nisi — Discharge — Effect — Jurisdiction — Whether proceedings may continue after discharge of rule nisi — Discharge of rule nisi terminates proceedings — Subsequent “judgment” a nullity. 1 LESOTHO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO HELD AT MASERU C of A (CIV) 57/24 CIV/APN/0064/2023ND In the matter between – ‘MAMPOLOKENG MATELA APPELLANT and DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS 1ST RESPONDENT NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS 2ND RESPONDENT CONSTITUENCY COMMITTEE OF DC BOTHA-BOTHE NO 5 3RD RESPONDENT ‘MANTSEBO MOHANOE 4TH RESPONDENT INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSION 5TH RESPONDENT MINISTRY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT 6TH RESPONDENT ATTORNEY GENERAL 7TH RESPONDENT CORAM: MOSITO P SAKOANE CJ VAN DER WESTHUIZEN AJA HEARD: 8 OCTOBER 2025 DELIVERED: 7 NOVEMBER 2025 2 FLYNOTE Civil Procedure — Rule nisi — Discharge — Effect — Jurisdiction — Whether proceedings may continue after discharge of rule nisi — Discharge of rule nisi terminates proceedings — Subsequent “judgment” a nullity. After the High Court issued a rule nisi on an urgent application concerning the nomination of the appellant as a local government election candidate, the court later discharged the rule nisi “with costs on de bonis propriis for the day.” Despite this, the matter proceeded to a purported hearing and judgment months later. On appeal, it was held that the discharge of a rule nisi ends the matter and removes the court’s jurisdiction to continue. The phrase “for the day” qualified the costs order, not the discharge itself. Subsequent proceedings were therefore incompetent. However, as both parties had participated in the irregular process, no order as to costs was made. Held: The discharge of a rule nisi concludes proceedings and cannot be revived. Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGMENT VAN DER WESTHUIZEN, AJA: Introduction [1] This appeal against a judgment of the High Court is rooted in a dispute around the nomination of the appellant as the Democratic Congress PR candidate in the Local Government elections of 29 September 2023. However, the merits of the matter are overshadowed by its apparent chaotic litigation history. 3 High Court [2] On the basis of urgency, the appellant approached the High Court to issue a rule nisi calling upon the respondents to show cause by a certain date why an order should “not be made absolute” (in the words of the Notice of Motion). The proposed order dealt with interdictory relief regarding the above-mentioned dispute. [3] On 14 November 2023, Nathane J ordered that a rule nisi be issued, returnable on 4 December 2023. [4] On the return date, 4 December 2023, Nathane J issued the following order: “The rule nisi issued on the 14th November 2023 be and is hereby discharged with costs on De Bonis Propriis for the day and the parties are to file the pleadings and heads of argument on the agreed upon dates.” [5] On 4 March 2025, Mokhoro J issued a “Judgment” of 53 paragraphs, culminating in an order that the “application be and is hereby dismissed with costs”. In para [1] of the judgment it is stated:”I made an order on 13 September 2024 …. What follows hereunder are my full reasons.” Grounds of Appeal [6] On 16 September 2024 – well before the delivery of the above-mentioned judgment with reasons on 4 March 2025 – the appellant filed seven “Grounds of Appeal”. On what these grounds were based, is unclear. 4 Reasons [7] The reasoned judgment was not available in the documentation made available to this Court. Instead, it was handed up during the hearing. Different explanations were offered by the Bar. When we were expected to read the lengthy document, it was not clear. However, in view of what follows, it is of little relevance. Rule nisi [8] The crucial question emanating from the order in [4] above is: How is it possible that the matter could have continued after the discharge of the rule nisi? It is trite that such a discharge means the end of a matter. [9] With reference to the words “for the day” in the order, counsel for the appellant argued that the rule nisi had been discharged for one day only. Such an interpretation would not be in accordance with a reasonable reading of the wording of the order and indeed be absurd. The phrase refers to the costs order. [10] According to lengthy explanations from the Bar, the matter indeed proceeded and was argued. None of these are to be found in the papers before this Court though. Furthermore, no reference thereto appears from the reasoned judgment. [11] Counsel agreed that legal avenues might have been available to rectify a blatantly incorrect or confusing order. None of these was pursued. Counsel for the appellant resorted to statements such as that “damage control” had been done; that the illegality of the process “paled into insignificance” in view of the greater quest 5 for justice; and that he was “in pain” and “crawling” before this Court. [12] Counsel representing the fourth respondent agreed that the discharge of the rule nisi was the end of the matter. Yet, he conceded that he had participated in the further proceedings. Conclusion [13] Generally, court rules and other law are not supposed to operate in opposition to justice. The first are there to ensure the second. It would seem that much time and energy were wasted – also by Mokhoro J – on the continuation of this matter after the discharge of the rule nisi. Some things cannot be resurrected from the grave. The appeal must be dismissed. Costs [14] Seeing that both sides participated in the chaotic events, no order as to costs would be fair. Order [15] The appeal is dismissed. ______________________________ J VAN DER WESTHUIZEN ACTING JUSTICE OF APPEAL 6 I agree: _____________________________ KE MOSITO PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL I agree: _____________________________ SP SAKOANE CHIEF JUSTICE FOR THE APPELLANTS: ADV CJ LEPHUTHING FOR THE RESPONDENTS: MR KD MABULU #### __Related documents ▲ To the top >