Grumpy loser: CoA blasts Mupane bidder
Mbongeni Mguni - Mpho Mokwape | Tuesday June 2, 2026 11:05
Nova and liquidator, Kopanang Thekiso, have been battling Ulsan since last year, over a creditors’ decision to approve the sale of the country’s sole gold mine to Nova. The battle to take over Mupane raged from last August after the Nova Africa joint venture, with an offer of $21 million, got the green light from creditors. Rival joint venture, Ulsan Botswana, offered an upfront $500,000 and up to P10 million upon further assessment of the mine.
In October, Ulsan secured a High Court interdict of the award to Nova, claiming several technical irregularities. In a scathing judgment issued last week on Thursday, a CoA bench set aside with costs the interim interdict secured at the High Court and upheld the appeal filed by Thekiso and Nova.
The bench comprising CoA president, Tebogo Tau, and Justices Isaac Lesetedi and Lot Moroka, said the High Court had erred in holding that Ulsan’s arguments held substantive weight sufficient for awarding the interim interdict.
“Ulsan casting itself as the most competitive and compliant bidder when the undisputable facts clearly pointed to the contrary is an act which is, at its best, self-conceited, and at its worst, disingenuous. “Quite evidently, Ulsan was nothing but a grumpy loser with no conceivable right to protect, let alone a prima facie one, but intent on frustrating the liquidation process on the back of whimsical grounds,” the CoA ruled.
The judges dismissed Ulsan’s primary argument that the liquidator had accepted Nova’s bid after the expiry of a deadline for all bidders. Instead, the CoA ruled that the language of the Request for Offers was categorical on the closing date for submissions, and when a bidder questioned inconsistencies, the liquidator had issued an email to bidders clarifying the closing date and time.
“Neither in its affidavits nor at the hearing was Ulsan able to show the wrongfulness of any conduct by the liquidator in the clarification of the closing, which merely confirms the date stipulated in the Request for Offers. “Nor was it able to show any prejudice,” the judgment reads.
The CoA also dismissed technical arguments from Ulsan, whilst upholding Nova and the liquidators’ own arguments against Ulsan. The judges came down hard on the High Court for not giving enough weight to the public interest arguments raised by the liquidator.
“It is quite clear that the court a quo did not give thought to a number of pertinent factors which were put before by the liquidator to have regard to in determining whether the balance of convenience favoured the grant or refusal of the remedy.
“Most importantly, it did not consider the welfare of the former employees of Mupane whose livelihoods depended on their income and whose non-payment of wages was, through the court petition of their union, what triggered the placement of Mupane into liquidation,” the judgment reads.
The CoA said the High Court did not give “thought at all” to the consideration of the cost implications of a drawn-out litigation process resulting from the interim interdict, especially as the liquidation purse was running low.
“Nor did the court a quo consider the possible deterioration of the assets of Mupane occasioned by the further drawn-out litigation and its negative impact on the liquidators.”
Mupane creditors are reportedly owed more than P345 million, including about P49 million due to workers represented by the Botswana Mineworkers Union.
The heated contest over the gold mine comes as prices of the precious metal enjoy the second year of historically elevated levels.