CoA throws out CJ Rannowane’s appeal
Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Monday May 8, 2023 06:00
Yesterday, Rannowane was left with an egg on the face after the CoA ruled that his appeal was invalid as it could not be allowed without leave.
Rannowane had approached the CoA seeking a stay of execution of orders made by Maun High Court's Judge, Professor Bugalo Maripe, and an expeditious hearing of his appeal against the same orders.
The orders interdicted Rannowane against transferring Komboni to the Francistown High Court pending the review application challenging the transfer as well as relocating the case from Maun to Gaborone to be placed before a panel of three chosen judges.
However, a panel of three CoA Justices led by Isaac Lestedi, Singh Walia and Goemekgabo Tebogo-Maruping all dismissed Rannowane’s application for stay of execution of Maripe’s orders and expedited appeal.
The panel agreed that there was no valid appeal before it as the CJ ought to have sought leave to appeal at the first instance as the rules dictates. This came after the panel had agreed that the first question that needed to be dealt with before proceeding with the reliefs sought was whether the orders were appealable as of right or only with leave.
“It is common cause that no leave to appeal was sought either from the High Court or from this Court. There having been no leave to appeal there is no valid appeal before this Court and for that reason the applications brought before this Court and the appeal filed against the decision of Maripe J stand to be struck out,” read the CoA Judgment prepared by Justice Lesetedi.
The CoA also said there is a distinction as regards appealability between three categories of judicial pronouncements in civil cases. These include judgments or orders which dispose finally of all or some of the issues in a matter; second, interlocutory orders which grant specific relief and, third, rulings (for example, on admissibility, evidence or as to how a matter should proceed).
“Those in the first category are appealable as of right; those in the second with leave and those in the third are not appealable,” further read the judgment.
The justices found that although Rannowane argued that the originating application which sought an interim interdict of the transfer of Judge Komboni pending the review application as the main proceedings, there is no doubt that the decision appealed against was in an interlocutory application to that proceeding.
“The order appealed against is therefore an interlocutory one within the contemplation of Section 11(a) of the Court of Appeal Act,” continues the CoA judgment.
The court likened the matter to a recusal application which is jurisdictional and decided that Judge Maripe had the jurisdiction to entertain the interlocutory application.
Meanwhile, the CoA refused to grant punitive costs against CJ Rannowane only ordering costs on an ordinary scale recoverable by Komboni. Justice Komboni had sought costs against the CJ on a higher scale on the basis of certain allegations the CJ had made in his affidavit which Komboni considered highly objectionable. Rannowane had in his founding affidavit accused Komboni of forum shopping among things when he questioned his decision to register his cases at the Maun High Court division.
“We are not inclined to consider costs at a higher scale as the remit of the present inquiry was only on the question of appealability and the Court did not enter into other issues raised by the parties on the content of affidavits and the merits,” concluded the judgment.
CJ Rannowane and justice Komboni have been engaged in a bitter legal battle following last year’s decision to relocate the latter to Francistown High Court. As their legal battle continues, the two have continued to trade damning accusations.