Employment Law

P.S Ministry of Labour and Employment Makhoabane Ledimo V Russel (CIV/APN/208/2019) [2021]LSHC 69 (15 April 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

Application for rescission – The Respondent having been dismissed from work by the 1st Applicant – The 1st Applicant having been the Principal Secretary of the 3rd Applicant – The 4th Applicant having been the lawful representative of the Applicants – The Respondent having instituted an application for review against her dismissal on the ground of having been irregularly conducted – The Applicants having not answered the application but proposed a settlement – The Applicants having not appeared before Court on the date scheduled for submission of the deed of settlement – The proposed deed of settlement not having brought before Court – The time for filing answering affidavit having been elapsed – The Court having granted the application as prayed for in the Notice of Motion – The Applicants having consequently instituted the present application for rescission through a counsel working for the 3rd Applicant. 

Held:

  1. The counsel for the Applicants have no authority to represent them since his letter of appointment refers to a different case from the one before Court;
  2. The Applicants failed to establish the elements for the application for rescission;
  3. The application for rescission is dismissed with costs at an attorney and client scale. 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                            CIV/APN/208/2019

In the matter between:

P.S MINISTRY OF LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT         1ST APPLICANT

MAKHOABANE LEDIMO – N.O.

(CHAIRPERSON OF HEARING)                              2ND APPLICANT

MINISTRY OF LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT               3RD APPLICANT

Seleke V The Minister of Trade and Industry (CIV/APN/437/2020) [2021]LSHC 67 (16 August 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

 

SUMMARY

The Applicant invoked the review powers of this Court asking it to declare the decision of the Minister in which he declined to renew his contract as the CEO of the 5th Respondent to be unlawful for being in conflict with Section 9B of the LNDC Act. He reasoned that the section compelled the Minister to follow the recommendation of the Board for the renewal of the contract.  A controversy ensued between the parties on the jurisdiction of the Court over the matter.  The Court held that the legislative exclusivity of jurisdiction of the labour courts over labour related matters, cannot exclude its inherent unlimited competency to review the decision and that its administrative nature also gave it the jurisdiction.         

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                         CIV/APN/437/2020

In the matter between:

MOHATO SELEKE                                                                APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER OF TRADE & INDUSTRY                      1ST RESPONDENT

P.S. MINISTRY OF TRADE & INDUSTRY                       2ND RESPONDENT

Matela V Lesotho Communication Authority (LAC/REV/03/2021) [2021]LSHC 53 (07 July 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

Summary

Suspension of a chief executive officer and removal of the chairperson of the LCA board of directors by the Minister of Communications – characterization of the decision - whether it amounts to administrative action - original jurisdiction of the Labour Appeal Court in terms of Section 38(A) of the Labour Code (amendment) Act 2000

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                      LAC/REV/03/2021

                                                               

In the matter between:

 

MAMARAME MATELA                                          1ST APPLICANT

MOTANYANE MAKARA                                       2ND APPLICANT

 

AND

 

Nkofo V Lesotho National Development Corporation (CIV/T/273/2017) [2021]LSHC 48 (10 August 2021);

Share

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/T/273/2017

 

In the matter between:

 

CHAKA NKOFO                                                           PLAINTIFF

 

AND

 

LESOTHO NATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION                           DEFENDANT

 

'Neko V Ministry of Public Works and Transport (CIV/APN/143/2020) [2021]LSHC 31 (17 June 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

                                                   SUMMARY

 

EMPLOYMENT LAW: Applicant claiming salary arrears for the period of her absence from work on account of having been dismissed unfairly- Held, applicant entitled to salary arrears as her absence from work was attributable to the employer’s conduct.

         

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/APN/143/20

 

In the matter between:

 

MOLEBOHENG ‘NEKO                                             APPLICANT

 

AND

 

MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND

TRANSPORT                                                               1ST RESPONDENT

 

Home Affairs Ex Workers v The P.S. Ministry of Home Affairs (C of A (CIV) 08/2021) [2021] LSCA 7 (14 May 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

High   Court– labour and constitutional jurisdiction– claim for renewal of fixed term contracts or alternatively, declarator that failure to renew contracts violates rights to property in the form of salary – fixed term contracts having expired automatically – clauses in contracts stipulating that resolution of disputes thereof to be made in accordance with the Labour Code – Appeal dismissed on account of jurisdiction.

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU

C OF A (CIV) No. 8/2021

CONST CASE NO.19/2011

In the matter of:

 

HOME AFFAIRS EX WORKERS                                  1ST APPELLANT                            

LIMPHO SISINYI                                                           2ND APPELLANT

MATSALI LINTSA                                                          3RD APPELLANT

Selebalo V COMPOL (CIV/APN/697/14) [2021]LSHC 05 (02 March 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

When re-instatement is ordered as a remedy for urgent dismissal, the employer must re-employ the dismissed employee as the first step. Secondly, the employee is entitled to receive payments that she would have been entitled to if the unfair dismissed had not occurred.

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

                                                                                                            CIV/APN/697/14

HELD AT MASERU

In the matter between:

MAMPESA SELEBALO                                                                         PLAINTIFF

VS

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE                                                    1ST  DEFENDANT

Principal Secretary- Ministry of Mining v Gugushe (C of A (CIV) 30/19) [2020] LSCA 33 (30 October 2020);

Share
Search Summary: 

Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Mines giving assurance that the Respondent study leave will be approved- Their successors charging the respondent for absenteeism and dismissing her without a hearing- an individual must be heard before a decision which will adversely affect him/her is made.

                  

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

                                                                             C OF A (civ) No 30/2019

                                                                                   Civ /APN/101/2018

HELD AT MASERU

In the matter between:

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF MINING                            1st APPELLANT

Hoohlo v Lesotho Electricity Company (C of A (CIV) 09/20) [2020] LSCA 23 (30 October 2020);

Share

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                          C OF A (CIV) NO.:   9/2020

 

CIV/APN/269/2018

 

In the matter between:

 

MBELE HOOHLO                                                     APPELLANT

 

 

AND

 

 

LESOTHO ELECTRICITY COMPANY

(PTY) LTD                                                             RESPONDENT

 

Leluma v The Commissioner of Police (CIV/APN/129/20) [2020] LSHC 45 (26 June 2020);

Share
Search Summary: 

Employment law- Applicant challenging his transfer from Maseru to Mokhotlong on the basis that it was both unreasonable and arbitrary- Application dismissed with costs.

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD  AT  MASERU                                  CIV/APN/129/2020

 

                                                             

In the Matter Between:-

 

HALEEO LELUMA                                     APPLICANT                                                

AND

 

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE             1ST RESPONDENT

Pages