Administrative Law

Ramoepana V The Crown (C of A (CRI) 05/2021) [2021] LSCA 38 (12 November 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

Administrative Law- when the Court may interfere with the DPP’s exercise of discretion or the lower Court’s discretion- The appellate Court will be slow to interfere with the exercise of discretion unless there is demonstrable irrationality- Such a challenge has to be done by notice of motion as these have to be review proceedings- appellant was not compliant with procedure, Section 59 of the Subordinate Court Order ought to have been specifically pleaded.- Appeal dismissed.

 

 

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU                                                       C OF A (CRI) 05/2021

CRI/T/0002/2018

In the matter between:

 

PITSO RAMOEPANE                                                     APPELLANT

 

AND

 

THE CROWN                                                                 1ST RESPONDENT

Matela V Lesotho Communication Authority (C of A (CIV) 35/2021) [2021] LSCA 37 (12 November 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

The Labour Appeal Court does not have jurisdiction to determine disputes around the dismissal of the Chief Executive Officer of the Lesotho Communications Authority by the Minister of Communications, Science and Technology. The Minister is empowered by the Communications Act 18 of 2012. Review of administrative action in terms of section 38A of the Labour Code (Amendment) Act 3 of 2000 is not applicable.

 

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

                                                                                                                                C OF A(CIV) 35/2021

 

In the matter between –

 

MAMARAME MATELA                                                                                                                       APPELLANT

and

Sankatana Social Democracy V Rammina (C of A (CIV) 01/2021) [2021] LSCA 35 (12 November 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

Membership in the National Reforms Authority- Respondent purportedly removed by the nominating political party in contravention of Section 5 (6) and 9 respectively of the National Reforms Authority Act of 2019- respondent not heard by appellant-the audi alteram partem rule must be observed- appeal dismissed.

                         

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU

                        C OF A (CIV) 01/2021

 CIV/APN/382/2021

In the matter between                                                                                                                     

SENKATANA SOCIAL DEMOCRACY               APPELLANT

And

LEFULESELE RAMMINA                         1ST RESPONDENT

Senkatana Social Democracy v Rammina & 3 Ors (C of A (CIV) 01/2001) [2021] LSCA 30 (12 November 2021);

Share

                         

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU

                        C OF A (CIV) 01/2021

 CIV/APN/382/2021

In the matter between                                                                                                                     

SENKATANA SOCIAL DEMOCRACY               APPELLANT

And

LEFULESELE RAMMINA                         1ST RESPONDENT

Mopeli V Compol (CIV/T/290/2019) [2021]LSHC 56 (23 August 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

Summary

Claim for payment of subsistence allowance - officers attending a short course abroad per authorization of the commissioner of police - necessary authorisation from the Head of Department not obtained - policy guidelines for attendance of training - not followed - claims dismissed

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                      CIV/T/290/2019

 

In the matter between

 

RAMATSOSO MOPELI                                        PLAINTIFF

 

AND

 

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE                               1STDEFENDANT MINISTRY OF POLICE                                     2ND DEFENDANT

Refela Diamonds (PTY) Ltd V Ministry of Mining (CIV/APN/404/2020) [2021]LSHC 55 (26 August 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

Summary

Application for review of the Minister’s decision declining an application for renewal of a prospecting licence-on grounds of unreasonableness, misinterpretation of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals Act of 2005  and legitimate expectation - the evidence presented does not establish improper excise of discretion - expectation arising from an undertaking made by the commissioner of Mines lacking statutory power to make same - application dismissed.

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(COMMERCIAL DIVISION)

 

HELD AT MASERU                                      CIV/APN/404/2020

 

In the matter between

 

REFELA DIAMONDS (PTY) LTD                           APPLICANT

 

AND

 

MINISTRY OF MINING                                      1ST RESPONDENT

MINISTER OF MINING                                       2ND RESPONDENT

Mofokeng V Commissioner of Police (CIV/APN/375/2020) [2021]LSHC 40 (25 October 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

 

SUMMARY

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Review of unterminated disciplinary proceedings- the applicant having brought an application for review of unterminated disciplinary process in the absence of exceptionality- the application dismissed with costs.

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/APN/375/2020

 

In the matter between:-

 

MOTLATSI MOFOKENG                                          PLAINTIFF

 

AND

 

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE                                  1st RESPONDENT

MINISTER OF POLICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY      2nd RESPONDENT

Sub-Inspector Seeiso V Officer Commanding Mafeteng Police Station (Senior Inspector Phatela) (CIV/APN/324/2020) [2021]LSHC 39 (17 June 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY:

ADMINITRATIVE LAW: Applicant challenging his transfer on the basis that he was not afforded pre-decision notice and hearing- Held, the applicant should have been given pre-decision notice of the intended course of action and an opportunity to make representations, there being no exceptionality justifying non-compliance with the requirement, application granted as prayed.

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/APN/324/2020

 

In the matter between:

 

SUB-INSPECTOR TEBELO SEEISO                         APPLICANT

 

AND

 

OFFICER COMMANDING MAFETENG

POLICE STATION

Phafane V National Dairy Board (CIV/APN/60/2020) [2021]LSHC 37 (25 March 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

 

ADMISTRATIVE LAW: Applicants challenging the 4th respondent’s termination of the 1st applicant’s membership of the 1st respondent- Jurisdictional facts necessary for the exercise of such power non-existent- Application granted with costs.

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/APN/60/2020

 

In the matter between

 

SIMON KUENA PHAFANE                                        1st APPLICANT

LESOTHO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

AND INUDSTRY                                                          2nd APPLICANT

 

AND

 

Nthulenyane V Principal Secretary, Ministry of Education (CIV/APN/52/2019) [2021]LSHC 29 (17 June 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: The propriety of the administrative decision-maker to correct its own decision it perceives to have been taken irregularly or unlawfully- Held, the Courts of law are the final arbiters of legality of administrative decision-making process not the administrators themselves.

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                    CIV/APN/52/2019

 

In the matter between:

 

‘MALECHESA NTHULENYANE                               APPLICANT

 

VS

 

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY

OF EDUCATION                                                         1st RESPONDENT

 

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY

Pages