WINDHOEK – The urgent court application launched by demoted Young African FC this week with the Windhoek High Court – which sought interim relief to have the club reinstated into the Namibia Premier League (NPL) – was yesterday struck off the roll with costs.
African, which was fined N$50 000 and demoted from the NPL last month by the league’s Disciplinary Committee for having registered and used Zimbabwean import Tapiwa Simon Musekiwa with tampered identity documents last season, this week launched an urgent application with the High Court seeking urgent interim relief and possible restoration back into top tier football.
But their urgent application was yesterday struck off the roll with costs because the club’s lawyers did not fully comply with the rules and timelines of the High Court when they gave notice of motion.
In fact, NPL and African Stars, who were the first and second respondents to the matter, objected to the service of notice as they pointed out the manner and time frames in which the notice was given to them – especially the use of e-mails – saying it is not in full compliance with the rules and norms of the High Court.
Additionally, both NPL and Stars further moved to have African’s case entirely dismissed by the court but the Gobabis-based club’s lawyers fought back saying such communication routes had to be taken as they had serious technical difficulties with loading affidavits on the court’s e-justice system, which is said to have been non-functional for some days last week.
Faced with arguments and counter-arguments from all three parties, presiding judge Claudia Claasen took a 20-minute break to thoroughly scrutinize the process of filing and serving, and upon resumption of proceedings she said that she was convinced that not all respondents may have had the opportunity to respond in the prescribed time frame and also advised that the deputy sheriff of the High Court be appointed to serve hard copy papers to all the respondents, in order to satisfy that sufficient time is availed to all summoned parties.
As a result, African’s motion failed to meet the required norms of the High Court in order to be heard on an urgent basis and will therefore likely have to follow the normal route of bringing their case forth and that process normally takes a few months or even up to a year sometimes to arrive at the desired outcome for the aggrieved