/ ~~ \ ·~-· : -~ i_ ~ ,
;· ' • . '\ \ I. , ...... , ·.
1.:'(1\;;'.:
~-- ~~2i'~ ·-<
,,,// ( J • \ ~>·:·:~,:~·
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN
In the matter between:
MOSEBETSI RICHERD MOFOKENG
and
Not Reportable
Case no: 3751/2022
APPLICANT
THE REGIONAL COURT MAGISTRATE C NEKOSI N.O. FIRST RESPONDENT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS SECOND RESPONDENT
Neutral citation: Mofokeng v The Regional Court Magistrate C Nekosi N.O. and
Another(3751/2022) [2026] ZAFSHC 56 (13 February 2026)
Coram:
Delivered:
Summary:
MOLITSOANE J et MAHLANGU AJ
13 February 2026
Leave to appeal - whether there are prospects of success on appeal
or there are other compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal - principles restated.
2
ORDER
1 The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2 There is no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
Molitsoane J (Mahlangu AJ concurring/dissenting?????)
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, the
judgment and order granted by this Court dismissing a review application of the
proceedings pending in the lower court.
[2] The applicant submits that we erred in not finding that the presiding magistrate
was biased against him. We dealt fully with this issue. The applicant has failed to
discharge the threshold of bias on the part of the presiding magistrate. In this application,
the applicant only rehashes the arguments he raised in the main application, which we
rejected.
[3] The application further seeks to challenge the factual and credibility findings made
by the trial court. It is trite that an appeal court will not interfere with credibility findings of
the trial court unless the court finds the same were clearly wrong. What is clear to us is
that the applicant conflates the appeal procedure with the review procedure. He seeks to
appeal the findings of the trial court under the guise of a review. The applicant has not
demonstrated such. It is contended that it was never the evidence of the applicant that he
had a formal graduation certificate. What was in issue was that the. applicant
misrepresented to his erstwhile employer that he had an LLB degree. In the heads of
argument in the application for leave to appeal, it is submitted that:
'A perusal of the record confirms that the Applicant consistently testified to possessing a "Letter
of Completion" which is distinct from a formal graduation certificate.
3
[5] This submission fails to deal with what the "Letter of Completion" was meant to
prove, what is it that the applicant completed. The only inference to be drawn as to what
the letter evinces can only be understood in the context of all the evidence, which is, that
he completed an LLB Degree.
[6] A serious allegations is made that the Honourable Magistrate had irregularly made
unauthorised additions and changes to the wording of the judgment and / or official record
of proceedings, this allegation was never pursued during the hearing before us and
accordingly, we did not deal with it in our judgment.
[7] In our view, the test for granting leave to appeal is settled. In our opinion, the
appeal against our order would not have a reasonable prospect of success on appeal or
that there are some compelling reasons why we should grant leave to appeal.
[8] We accordingly order as follows:
1 The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2 There is no order as to costs.
I concur.
P E MOLITSOANE
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
Appearances
For the applicants:
Instructed by:
For the respondent:
Instructed by:
T T Hlapolosa
TT Hlapolosa Inc,
Johannesburg
c/o Seobe Attorneys,
Bloemfontein
EB Ontong
Director of Public Prosecutions ,
Bloemfontein.
4