CIV/APN/41/90

IN THE
HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

In the
Application of :

L.P.S.
FOOTBALL CLUB Applicant

V

MEJAMETALANA
PROFESSIONAL F.C. 1st Respondent

LESOTHO
SPORTS COUNCIL 2nd .Respondent

JUDGMENT
Delivered by the Hon. Mr Justice M.L. Lehohla on the 13th day of
February , 1990

The
applicant approached this Court on urgent basis seeking an order of
this Court setting aside a decision delivered by 2nd Respondent
on
1st February, 1990.

It
appears that following a protest by the 1st Respondent that one
Palime Letuba allegedly a player for Maseru Brothers F.C. was
fielded
as a player by the applicant without any transfer forms entitling him
to do so having previously been filled and filed
in the relevant
office of the 2nd Respondent a decision was made by the 2nd
Respondent.

Consequently
the applicant forfeited the points for the game it was alleged to
have fielded Letuba in. The initial decision was
given by the Senior
Football Executive Committee a sub-committee of the 2nd Respondent.

On appeal
to the 2nd Respondent the decision of the sub-committee was
confirmed.

2

The
sub-committee observed the witnesses and heard their respective
versions. Obviously it did not believe the applicant's evidence
that
Letuba was on duty at the Prisons Department where he works
throughout the period when he was observed by witnesses who saw
him
play for the applicant on 16th September 1989 while he had earlier
been seen playing for Maseru Brothers F.C. on 2-9-89 and
2-4-89
respectively.

The
second respondent was invited by the applicant to correct a mistake
by the Senior Football Executive Committee. The second respondent

complied and no doubt. basing itself on EX."A" a Duty List
for Prisons Department substituted the time 1400 hrs to 2200
for 0600
hrs to 1400hrs.

Otherwise
the 2nd respondent declined to interfere with the decision of the
Senior Football Excutive Committee.

I
listened to the arguments and read the papers but have not been able
to find any irregularity on the basis of which this Court
can be said
to be entitled to interfere. It is not for this court in a matter
like this to substitute its verdict for that of the
tribunal of first
instance in the absence of proof of bias, unreasonability prejudice,
ill motive or corruption levelled at that
tribunal.

The
application is dismissed with costs.

JUDGE.

12th
February, 1990.

For
Applicant : Mr Mphalane

For
Respondents : Mr Monaphathi.