Maputsoe Properties and Others v Mamatlakala Maphisa and Others (CIV/T 136 of 2006) [2012] LSHC 87 (2 August 2012)

Maputsoe Properties and Others v Mamatlakala Maphisa and Others (CIV/T 136 of 2006) [2012] LSHC 87 (2 August 2012)

Applicants have not complied with the rules regarding security for costs and joinder of interested parties; interlocutory orders are not appealable without leave; the application cannot proceed until procedural requirements are met.

Citation
[2012] LSHC 87
Parties
Applicant: Maputsoe Properties; Applicant: Total Lesotho (Pty) Limited; Respondent: 'Mamatlakala Maphisa; Respondent: The Deputy Sheriff of the High Court, Maseru; Respondent: Land Administration Authority Maseru; Respondent: Land Administration Authority Leribe; Respondent: Land Registrar – Leribe; Respondent: Attorney – General
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
2 August 2012
Case Number
CIV/T 136 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Motion / Ruling on Urgent Application for Stay and Security for Costs
Outcome
Application stood down pending compliance with Rule 48 on security for costs.
Legal Topics
Urgent Application, Security for Costs, Stay of Execution, Interlocutory Orders, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Urgent Application Security for Costs Stay of Execution Interlocutory Orders Appeal Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maputsoe Properties

Applicant

Total Lesotho (Pty) Limited

Applicant

'Mamatlakala Maphisa

Respondent

The Deputy Sheriff of the High Court, Maseru

Respondent

Land Administration Authority Maseru

Respondent

Land Administration Authority Leribe

Respondent

Land Registrar – Leribe

Respondent

Attorney – General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Motion / Ruling on Urgent Application for Stay and Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to a stay of transfer of property pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether security for costs must be furnished before proceeding
  3. 3 Whether interlocutory orders are appealable without leave of court

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants have not complied with the rules regarding security for costs and joinder of interested parties; interlocutory orders are not appealable without leave; the application cannot proceed until procedural requirements are met.

Court Disposition

Application stood down pending compliance with Rule 48 on security for costs.

Orders

  • Matter stood down until 2:30 pm, 2nd August 2012 for compliance with Rule 48.
  • Applicants to indicate position on security for costs; if not furnished, respondent may invoke further provisions of Rule 48.