Procedure

Khoeli V Majara (CIV/APN/10/2022) [2022]LSHC 32 (05 May 2022);

Share

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                           CIV/APN/10/2022

 

In the matter between:

LIREKO MONICA KHOELI                                                     1ST APPLICANT

ONYX 357 BROADCASTING & DÉCOR (PTY) LTD                  2ND APPLICANT

 

AND

 

United Motors Pty Ltd V Zhang (CIV/A/32/2020) [2022]LSHC 30 (24 May 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

 

Magistrate’s Court – Civil proceedings – Jurisdiction – Claim for ejectment based on ownership – Subordinate Court Act 1988 – Sections 15(1) and 17(1) (c) interpreted and applied – Appeal against grant of summary judgment and order of ejectment – Whether defendant did not have a bona fide defence – Subordinate Court Rule 14(4) (c) and 14 (5) applied.

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

                                                                                                                                            

Held at Maseru    

                                                                                                               CIV/A/32/2020

In the matter between:

 

UNITED MOTORS (PTY) LTD                                        APPELLANT

                               

Kamoli V The Director of Public Prosecutions (CRI/T/0002/2018) [2022]LSHC 29 (04 April 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

Recusal – approach to application for – objective test applied. Application dismissed-no order as to costs.

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                         CRI/T/0002/2018

In the matter between:

 

TLALI KENNEDY KAMOLI                                             APPLICANT

AND

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS                    RESPONDENT

 

IN RE:

REX

V

Monaheng V Mokhele (CCA/0040/2022) [2022]LSHC 26 (23 April 2022);

Share
Flynote: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Commercial Court Division)

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                              CCA/0040/2022

In the matter between:

MOJELA MICHAEL MONAHENG                                                             APPLICANT                                                                                      

And

Laxton Group Limited V Procurement Unit, Independent Electrol Commission (CCA/0039/2022) [2022]LSHC 25 (05 May 2022);

Share

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Commercial Court Division)

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                              CCA/0039/2022

In the matter between:

LAXTON GROUP LIMITED                                       APPLICANT               

And

PROCUREMENT UNIT,

INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSION         1ST RESPONDENT

 

THE TENDER PANEL,

Lehora V Land Building and Civil Construction (CCT/0358/2021) [2022]LSHC 24 (11 April 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY:

 

Application in terms of Rule 30(1) of the High Court Rules of 1980 – Applicant  claiming that respondents took an improper or irregular step –  Respondents having not complied with the request for further particulars instead lodged application for Summary Judgement – Applicant claiming that the respondents should have first provided the requested particulars and that the summary  judgment application was set down for hearing less than seven days from the date of its delivery – Summary judgement application set aside as improper or irregular step for want of proper notice.

 

                                    

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Commercial Court Division)

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                   CCT/0358/2021

 

In the matter between:

 

KHALANYANE ELLIOT LEHORA                                       APPLICANT                                                                       

And

LAND R BUILDING AND CIVIL

Rex V Kamoli (CRI/T/0001/2018) [2022]LSHC 17 (11 May 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

 

Summary

Recusal application – prosecutor absenting himself from court proceedings without leave of court and attends to another case without knowledge of court – application for postponement filed by the DPP because  of absence of prosecutor – misleading information placed before court in support of such application – prosecutor being the source of such information – another prosecutor appointed – previous prosecutor disqualified from appearing in the case – remarks disapproving manner in which the Crown counsel conducted himself – whether the disqualification of the prosecutor and remarks made in course of proceedings constitute reasonable apprehension of bias – ethical obligations of prosecutors – Speedy Court Trials Act, 2002, sections 5(1), 9(4) and 12(4)

 

 

REPORTABLE

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

Held at Maseru

CRI/T/0001/2018

In the matter between:

 

REX                                                                                            APPLICANT

                                        

 And

 

KENNEDY TLALI KAMOLI                                                            1ST ACCUSED

Masupha V Masupha (CIV/APN/246/2017) [2022]LSHC 15 (10 March 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

CONDONATION - Application for condonation of failure to deliver an answering affidavit within the period stipulated in High Court Rule 8 (10) (b) – Applicant must in terms of Rule 59 satisfy the court that it is in the interests of justice to exercise its discretion in favour of  condoning the failure to follow the rules – Nature of court’s discretion and factors to be considered in exercising it discussed.

 

CHIEFTAINSHIP -  Whether the King ought to be joined in proceedings challenging a legal notice made pursuant to section 14(2) of the Chieftainship Act. 

 

King having acted on the advice of the Minister of Local Government and Chieftainship Affairs- Court finds it improper and unnecessary  to cite or join the King in such proceedings- where the King in such circumstances has been so advised by the Minister he is obliged to follow the advice and act accordingly. Therefore, it is unnecessary to burden the King with service where no direct recourse is sought or may be obtained against him.

 

Reviewing and setting aside of the advice of the Minister of Chieftainship Affairs to the King, as to who should succeed to the office of Chief.

 

Setting aside of a government notice declaring a successor to chieftainship.

 

Declarator of the lawful and rightful Chief.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

Held at Maseru

                                                                                                CIV/APN/246/2017

In the matter between:

MAKOAE MASUPHA                                                           APPLICANT

 

And                                                                                                           

 

Kompi V The Government of Lesotho (CIV/APN/316/2021) [2022]LSHC 14 (10 March 2022);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Practice and procedure – Review of employment-related decisions and actions of the government as employer of a public officer – Such disputes fall outside the High Court’s review jurisdiction – The entry point is the fora created by the Public Service Act, i.e. the public officers’ dispute settlement regime.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

                                                                                                                                            

Held at Maseru    

                                                                                                               CIV/APN/316/2021

In the matter between:

 

TSOKOLO FRANZ KOMPI & OTHERS                         APPLICANTS

                               

Moalosi V Medical Superitendent Machabeng Hospital (CIV/T/810/2019) [2021]LSHC 26 (11 November 2021);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

                                                                         SUMMARY

Civil Practice and Procedure: The Plaintiff applying to have the defendant’s plea filed more than a year late, without applying for upliftment of the bar, to be set aside as an irregular step- Held, the such a late filing of plea constitutes an irregular step and is accordingly set aside.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/T/810/19

 

In the matter between

 

RETHABILE MOALOSI O.B.O

TEBOHO MOALOSI                                                   PLAINTIFF

 

AND

 

MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT                               

Pages