Ramoeketsi v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (C of A (CIV) 26 of 1996) [1998] LSCA 88 (31 July 1998)

C OF A (CIV) NO.26 OF 1996 IN T HE L E S O T HO C O U RT OF A P P E AL In the matter between: L E H L O KA RAMOEKETSI APPELLANT and THE MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS 1ST RESPONDENT T HE A T T O R N EY G E N E R AL 2 ND RESPONDENT Held at: M A S E RU Coram: STEYN, P V AN D EN H E E V E R, JA SHEARER, A JA STEYN" P: J U D G M E NT It is not necessary for us to set out the facts of this matter for the purposes of the adjudication of the appeal. During argument it became clear that the only ground of appeal which had merit and was being pursued, concerned an amount which had been agreed between the / -2- parties at the trial as being due, although payment of this was not ordered by the Court a quo. It is common cause that all that was required, was quantification of the amount due to be paid by respondent. That has n ow been done by the parties, in the agreed sum of M4812-54. It was also clear, however, that appellant has never sought to recover this agreed amount from the respondent. Neither did he seek to rectify the judgment in terms of Rule 45 (1). The rule reads as follows and is applicable to the present set of facts: "45. (1) The court may, in addition to any other powers it m ay have mero motu or upon the application of any party affected, rescind or vary — (a) an order or judgment erroneously sought or erroneously granted in the absence of any party affected thereby, (b) an order or judgment in which there is an ambiguity or a patent error or omission, but only to the extent of such ambiguity, error or omission; (c) an order or judgment granted as a result of a mistake c o m m on to the parties." Instead of taking one of these two steps, appellant has appealed against the whole of the High. Court judgment and sought - without any merit - to prosecute an appeal in which he sought an order for payment of M121,478.92. This appeal in turn led to the preparation of a record of more than 250 pages. All these costs have therefore been needlessly incurred. / In the circumstances, and save that the agreement of the respondent to pay appellant the agreed amount of M4812-54 is recorded and confirmed, the appeal is dismissed with costs. -3- J. H. STEYN PRESIDENT OF T HE COUHT OF APPEAL L. V AN D EN H E E V EB J U D GE OF APPEAL. D. S H E A R ER ACTING J U D GE OF APPEAL I agree: I agree: Delivered at Maseru this 31st day of July 1 9 9 8. For appellant : For respondents :