Lawyer loses suit against former client

Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Thursday February 22, 2018 15:42

 

Lobatse High Court judge Mercy Garekwe this week dismissed Mooketsi’s action with punitive costs on the basis that there is a notice of pending action which deals with the same costs of subject before a different court.

The amount of P37,870 claimed by Mooketsi arises from an alleged taxed bill of costs consented by defendant, after the former instituted court proceedings on behalf of the latter against one Tebogo Mozhuba. 

According to the court papers, Mooketsi had sought and obtained a writ of execution in the taxed amount against the defendant.

She was then interdicted, restrained from executing the writ of execution on February 17, 2017 after Mosienyane lodged an urgent application of interdiction through Ndadi Law firm.

She appealed the decision at the Francistown High Court on March 9, 2017 but filed another application of claiming unpaid fees before Lobatse High Court. 

However, Justice Garekwe dismissed her action with costs in favour of the defendant.

In her ruling, the judge expressed displeasure and frowned at the behaviour and attitude of the plaintiff stating that it is unacceptable from an officer of the court.

She said the plaintiff’s insistence on proceedings with this action even in the face of the pending appeal is mind-boggling. 

“Any reasonable litigant, more so the person of the plaintiff who happens to be a practicing attorney and an officer of this Court, therefore deemed to have exposure to the law, its meaning and application would have retreated at the earliest possible time when the special plea of lis pendens was brought to her attention,” Garekwe said.

“Her insistence on the present claim whilst she has not withdrawn her appeal, borders on contempt as it lacks any reasonable excuse. The court’s time has been unnecessarily wasted on a matter which could have long been resolved if reason was allowed to prevail in the mind of the attorney plaintiff,” she added.

Although Mooketsi had argued that the appeal at the Francistown High Court and current action are different, as the appeal is on the issue of urgency and the punitive costs awarded against her, the judge dismissed her stating that the present matter has been prompted by the interdiction of writ of execution related to the legal costs that are subject to the subject matter of the present action.