Actions and applications

Puma Energy Lesotho (Pty) Ltd V Sehlabo (CCA/0092/2021) [2022] LSHC 116 (20 September 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

Summary

Civil application – Applicants alleging existence of oral agency agreement between the parties – Respondents denying existence of agency agreement but alleging another arrangement – The terms of the arrangement fitting the description of the oral agency agreement and the Respondents conducting themselves in terms of the alleged agency agreement – Consensus inferred from the conduct of the Respondents that there was agency agreement between the parties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Commercial Court Division)

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                   CCA/0092/2021

In the matter between:

PUMA ENERGY LS (Pty) Ltd                                                                    1STAPPLICANT TOTAL LESOTHO (Pty) Ltd                                                                        2ND APPLICANT

And

RESKOL Diamond PTY LTD V Minister of Mining (CCA/0047/2021) [2022] LSHC 114 (09 September 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

Summary

 

Application – Review of Minister’s decision declining renewal of a mining lease  under section 36 (5) of the Mines and Minerals Act No.4 of 2005 -Applicant not invoking  rule 50 (4) of High Court Rules 1980, but raising further grounds of review in its replying affidavit – Minister’s discretionary powers under section 36 (5) circumscribed – Section 44 negotiations intended for parties to agree terms and conditions of new mining  agreement – No need to enter into negotiations if the applicant does not meet the requirements for renewal under section 36 (5) – Application dismissed

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Commercial Court Division)

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                      CCA/0047/2021

 

In the matter between:

 

RESKOL DIAMOND (Pty) Ltd                                     APPLICANT                                         

And

MINISTER OF MINING                                                1STRESPONDENT

 

Standard Lesotho Bank Limited V Mateka t/a Motlejoa Guest House (CCT/0115/2020) [2022] LSHC 111 (18 August 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY:

Application for Summary Judgment – Defendant moving the Court to ignore particulars of claim attached to the summons in considering the application – The propriety of Applicant’s reliance on evidential documents attached to the summons considered – Application for summary judgment granted. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ESOTHO

(Commercial Court Division

 

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CCT/0115/2020

 

 

In the matter between:

 

 

STANDARD LESOTHO BANK LIMITED                 APPLICANT

 

 

And

 

 

MAMATELA AMOHETSE MATEKA t/a

Mokaeane V Palime (CIV/T/351/2021) [2022] LSHC 110 (29 June 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

Application for rescission of an order dismissing a rescission application for want of prosecution – Application opposed – Urgency not established but 1st respondent acquiesced to the urgency – Despite lack of urgency court exercised discretion to deal with merits – Grounds for rescission under Rule 45(1)(a) not established – Counsel lacking authority to institute or oppose application (obiter dictum)– Application dismissed- Each party to bear its own costs.

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                        CIV/T/351/2021

 

In the matter between:-

 

RETHABILE MOKAEANE                                        APPLICANT

 

v                                                               

 

LINEO PALIME                                                          RESPONDENT

 

Chaka V NEC Revolution for prosperity (CIV/APN/0254/2022) [2022] LSHC 108 (08 September 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

The applicant in the main asked the Court to order the respondents to forward her names to the Independent Electoral Commission as the candidate for the RFP political party in the 2022 national general elections following her success over the others who were interviewed at the final stage of the meritocracy selection of the best candidate.  The party declined to so forward her name due to its subsequent finding that she is a member of its rival TEB political party.  Having been re-summoned by the RFP to be interrogated on the allegations of her membership to the TAB, she gave conflicting explanations compromising her credibility.  It was not disputed that she knew about the meritocracy policy of the party since she participated in its processes and instituted this litigation to benefit from it.  The court found that the documentarily proven duality of her membership to the two parties rendered the mutuality of trust between the RFP and herself placed in jeopardy to justify its declination.  In the circumstances, her constitutional right to participate in the public affairs was found not to have been violated.  The application was consequently refused.     

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                           CIV/APN/0254/2022

 

In the matter between:

MAATANG CHAKA                                                                  APPLICANT

 

AND

 

NEC REVOLUTION FOR PROSPERITY                          1ST RESPONDENT

Mphutlane t/a Matsili Car Rental V WBHO-LSP Joint Venture (CCT/0560/2021) [2022] LSHC 105 (06 September 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

Civil Procedure – exception application in terms of Rule 29(2) – exception on the ground of vagueness- what constitutes?

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(COMMERCIAL DIVISION)

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                               CCT/0560/2021

In the matter between –

 

REITUMETSE MPHUTLANE t/a MATSILI CAR RENTALPLAINTIFF

 

And

 

WBHO-LSP JOINT VENTURE                                         DEFENDANT

 

Kabane V Pricipal Secretary Ministry of Police and Public Safety (CIV/APN/226/2018) [2022] LSHC 98 (17 June 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

 

Contempt of court – Application not opposed - Party not properly cited – Notice of Motion not addressed to anyone - Elements of Contempt – facts relied upon not proving contempt– facts alleged supporting ad pecuniam solvendam – applicant failed to discharge burden – no contempt proven beyond reasonable doubt – no order as to costs. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                       

CIV/APN/226/ 2018

 

In the matter between

 

MAKOBELI LIMPHO KABANE                                            APPLICANT

 

AND

 

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY                                               1ST RESPONDENT 

Dr. Michel Ilunga Yangindu V The Registrar-Lesotho Medical, Dental and Pharmacy Council (CIV/APN/37/2021) [2022] LSHC 87 (26 May 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY:

Contempt of court-locus standi for contempt of court-jurisdiction of the court in contempt proceedings. Complying with an unlawful court order.

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                              CIV/APN/37/2021

 

In the matter between

 

DOCTOR MICHEL ILUNGA YANGINDU                            APPLICANT

V

THE REGISTRAR - LESOTHO MEDICAL

DENTAL, AND PHARMACY COUNCIL                     1ST RESPONDENT

LESOTHO MEDICAL AND PHARMACY

Nedbank Lesotho Limited V D & P Drilling and Blasting (PTY) Ltd (CCT/0034/2021) [2022]LSHC 81 (04 March 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

Summary

Application for summary judgement - Rule 28(3)(b) requirements restated - defendant making bald assertions of their defense – failing to meet the requirements of the rule - application for summary judgement granted

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                      CCT/0034/2021                       

In the matter between

 

NEDBANK LESOTHO LTD                                    PLAINTIFF

 

AND

 

D & P DRILLING AND BLASTING (PTY) LTD        1ST DEFENDANT

DEREK RONALD JACOBS                                    2ND DEFENDANT

Botha V Lesotho Revenue Authority (CIV/APN/289/2017) [2022]LSHC 73 (16 March 2022);

Share

CIV/APN/289/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

Held at Maseru

In the matter between:-

 

Martinus Christoffel Botha                                      1st Applicant

Emseebee (PTY) LTD                                                2nd Applicant

Vs

Lesotho Revenue Authority                                     1st Respondent

Pages