Liteboho Ramakhula & Ano. V The Chairperson-Mafeteng Urban Council & & Others (C of A (CIV) No 08/2024) [2024] LSCA 14 (1 November 2024)

Liteboho Ramakhula & Ano. V The Chairperson-Mafeteng Urban Council & & Others (C of A (CIV) No 08/2024) [2024] LSCA 14 (1 November 2024)

The High Court erred in declining jurisdiction and refusing mandamus; once the threshold requirements under Regulation 44 are met, the allocating authority must process the nomination and objections, and the issue of heirship is to be determined through that process, not as a precondition.

Citation
[2024] LSCA 14
Parties
1st Appellant: Liteboho Ramakhula; 2nd Appellant: Makalosi Ramakhula; 1st Respondent: The Chairperson-Mafeteng Urban Council; 2nd Respondent: Mafeteng Urban Council; 3rd Respondent: Ministry of Local Government & Chieftainship; 4th Respondent: Master of High Court; 5th Respondent: Attorney General; 6th Respondent: Mona Diana Ramakhula; 7th Respondent: Masetsoana Ramakhula; 8th Respondent: Kalosi Ramakhula
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
1 November 2024
Case Number
C of A (CIV) No 08/2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Mandamus, Jurisdiction, Heirship, Land Allocation, Customary Succession
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Land Law Succession Law Mandamus Jurisdiction Heirship Land Allocation Customary Succession

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Liteboho Ramakhula

1st Appellant

Makalosi Ramakhula

2nd Appellant

The Chairperson-Mafeteng Urban Council

1st Respondent

Mafeteng Urban Council

2nd Respondent

Ministry of Local Government & Chieftainship

3rd Respondent

Master of High Court

4th Respondent

Attorney General

5th Respondent

Mona Diana Ramakhula

6th Respondent

Masetsoana Ramakhula

7th Respondent

Kalosi Ramakhula

8th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in refusing an order of mandamus to compel the Mafeteng Urban Council to act under Regulation 44 of the Land Regulations 2011
  2. 2 Whether the issue of heirship must be determined before invoking Regulation 44 procedures

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in declining jurisdiction and refusing mandamus; once the threshold requirements under Regulation 44 are met, the allocating authority must process the nomination and objections, and the issue of heirship is to be determined through that process, not as a precondition.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The 1st and 2nd respondents are ordered to act in accordance with Regulation 44 of the Land Regulations 2011 within 14 days from the date of this order.
  • No order as to costs.