Legal Practice

Hlalele V The Honourable Prime Minister of Lesotho Dr. Moeketsi Majoro (CIV/APN/272/20) [2020] LSHC 52 (09 December 2020);

Share

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO                    

HELD AT MASERU                                                   CIV/APN/272/20                                                    

In the matter between:             

MOTHABATHE HLALELE                                        Applicant

And

THE HONOURABLE PRIME MINISTER OF

LESOTHO DR. MOEKETSI MAJORO                       1st Respondent

Tlalajoe v Tlalajoe (CIV/T/308/16) [2020] LSHC 40 (15 October 2020);

Share
Search Summary: 

CIVIL PRACTICE-Applicant instituting an application for rescission on the basis of Rule 45 (1) (a), that the order of division of joint estate was erroneously sought and granted in his absence- Applicable principles restated and application dismissed with costs.

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                          CIV/T/308/16

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

 

‘MARETHABILE TLALAJOE                                         PLAINTIFF                                                 

AND

 

TEBOHO TLALAJOE                                                    DEFENDENT

 

Shale v The Judicial Service Commission (CIV/APN/49/18) [2020] LSHC 39 (26 June 2020);

Share
Search Summary: 

Civil Practice- Applicant seeking costs despite the application being moot- application dismissed on account that costs order is consequential to determination of the merits, and therefore, in the absence of that, costs cannot be granted.

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                          CIV/APN/49/18

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

 

MOJELA SHALE                                                         APPLICANT                                               

AND

 

THE JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION                      1ST RESPONDENT

 

Leqele v Storm Mountain Diamonds (Pty)Ltd (CIV/T/558/18) [2019] LSHC 62 (12 December 2019);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

CASE SUMMARY:   Civil Practice:  Exception that the pleadings are vague and embarrassing – Principles pertaining thereto re-stated – exception dismissed with costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                         CIV/T/558/2018

 

In the Matter between:-

SELAE MPHUTLANE LEQELE                                                       PLAINTIFF

AND

STORM MOUNTAIN DIAMONDS (PTY) LTD                           DEFENDANT

___________________________________________________________________

 

Ramahloko v The Learned Magistrate Mr. Kolobe (CIV/APN/77/19) [2019] LSHC 55 (12 September 2019);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Civil Procedure- Abuse of ex parte and urgency procedure- Propriety of applicant’s counsel certifying urgency considered

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                                     CIV/APN/77/19

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

MOSITO RAMAHLOKO                                                                            APPLICANT

 

AND

THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE                                                                 1ST RESPONDENT

MR. KOLOBE

All Basotho Convention v Principal Secretary, Min. of Law, Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights (CIV/APN/412/19) [2019] LSHC 52 (19 December 2019);

Share
Search Summary: 

Civil Practice- Authority to represent a juristic person- Applicable principles- Principles of review restated

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                         CIV/APN/412/19

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

ALL BASOTHO CONVETION                                                        APPLICANT

AND

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY – MINISTRY OF LAW                        1ST RESPONDENT

CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Koetle v Lesotho National Olympic Committee (CIV/APN/42/18) [2018] LSHC 33 (18 May 2018);

Share
Search Summary: 

CASE SUMMARY:

Application to review unterminated disciplinary hearing on jurisdictional ground- Held jurisdictional ground can be challenged on review as it vitiates the proceedings.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                    CIV/APN/42/2018

 

In the Matter between:-

 

TŠOANELO KOETLE                                                                       1ST APPLICANT

 

 

LIOLI FOOTBALL CLUB                                                                  2ND APPLICANT

 

VS

 

Molapo v Molapo (CIV/APN/94/20) [2020] LSHC 31 (25 September 2020);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

CIVIL PRACTICE: The applicant applying for contempt of court against the respondent for defying an order of court- Contempt of court principles re-stated and applied- The respondent found to be in contempt.

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                         CIV/APN/94/20

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

‘MALEROTHOLI MOLAPO                                           APPLICANT                                               

AND

 

TEBATSO MOLAPO                                                    1ST RESPONDENT

 

STATION COMMANDER

Malokotsa v Seqhee (CIV/T/565/18) [2020] LSHC 30 (05 March 2020);

Share
Search Summary: 

CASE SUMMARY:  Civil Practice:  The plaintiff suing the defendant requesting a declarator that a developed site forms part of the plaintiff’s joint estate with her late husband who had cohabited with the defendant – the defendant excepting to the pleadings on the basis that the High Court in its ordinary jurisdiction cannot hear and determine matters which fall under the jurisdiction of Land Court  - Held that although ordinarily, an objection to jurisdiction should be  raised by way of a special plea, it is however, permissible for it to be raised as an exception where lack thereof is apparent ex facie the pleadings.      

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                         CIV/T/565/18

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

‘MAFOLE ELIZA MALOKOTSA                                                    PLAINTIFF

AND

‘MAAKHENTE SEQHEE                                                                 DEFENDENT

 

Selikane v Nkhope (CCA/0027/20) [2020] LSHC 28 (17 August 2020);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Summary:

CIVIL PRACTICE- Applicant launching an application in circumstances where material disputes of fact were reasonably foreseeable- Applicable principles re-stated-Application dismissed on account that it was reasonably foreseeable that material disputes of fact would arise- Raising points in limine and the approach to determining validity of same- Lis pendens and how it should be dealt with- The court determining that it was in the interest of fairness and convenience to the parties that the application be dealt with on account of the fact that the parties have been awaiting judgment for two years in the initial matter.

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                   CCA/0027/2020

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

 

TS’EPISO SELIKANE                                          APPLICANT                                                     

AND

 

MANAPO NKHOPE                                              1ST RESPONDENT

 

Pages