Makhetha v Flash Construction (LC 66 of 99) [2001] LSLC 20 (11 December 2001)

Makhetha v Flash Construction (LC 66 of 99) [2001] LSLC 20 (11 December 2001)

The court lacked jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim due to late filing without condonation. Severance pay and leave entitlement were not due as the applicant had not met the minimum periods of service required by law.

Citation
[2001] LSLC 20
Parties
Applicant: Ismael Makhetha; Respondent: Flash Construction
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
11 December 2001
Case Number
LC 66 of 99
Procedural Posture
Labour Dispute / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Severance Pay, Leave Entitlement, Jurisdiction, Limitation Period
Source Language
English
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Severance Pay Leave Entitlement Jurisdiction Limitation Period

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ismael Makhetha

Applicant

Flash Construction

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Dispute / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's dismissal was unfair
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to severance pay, arrears of salary, leave, and notice pay
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction given the late filing

Ratio Decidendi

The court lacked jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim due to late filing without condonation. Severance pay and leave entitlement were not due as the applicant had not met the minimum periods of service required by law.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • No order as to costs