Seitlheko and Others v Khampepe and Others (CIV/APN 292 of 2011) [2011] LSHC 109 (11 November 2011)

Seitlheko and Others v Khampepe and Others (CIV/APN 292 of 2011) [2011] LSHC 109 (11 November 2011)

Applicants have locus standi as card-carrying members supported by a petition, but the application is not urgent due to inordinate and unexplained delay since the cause of action arose in 2008 and applicants only acted in 2011.

Citation
[2011] LSHC 109
Parties
Applicant: Kalinyane Seitlheko; Applicant: Khopotso Ts’ehlo; Applicant: Soke Molefe; Respondent: Serame Khampepe; Respondent: Kimetso Mathaba; Respondent: Letuka Nkole; Respondent: Ntja Thoola; Respondent: Nthekeleng Mofolo; Respondent: Daniel Nkopane; Respondent: Maqetelo Khetla; Respondent: Maliau Pita; Respondent: Kholoang Moloi; Respondent: National Executive Committee of the National Independent Party; Respondent: National Independent Party; Respondent: The Registrar General; Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
11 November 2011
Case Number
CIV/APN 292 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Constitutional/administrative Application / Judgment on Preliminary Objections
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of urgency; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Urgency in Applications, Non Joinder of Parties, Internal Political Party Disputes
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Locus Standi Urgency in Applications Non Joinder of Parties Internal Political Party Disputes

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kalinyane Seitlheko

Applicant

Khopotso Ts’ehlo

Applicant

Soke Molefe

Applicant

Serame Khampepe

Respondent

Kimetso Mathaba

Respondent

Letuka Nkole

Respondent

Ntja Thoola

Respondent

Nthekeleng Mofolo

Respondent

Daniel Nkopane

Respondent

Maqetelo Khetla

Respondent

Maliau Pita

Respondent

Kholoang Moloi

Respondent

National Executive Committee of the National Independent Party

Respondent

National Independent Party

Respondent

The Registrar General

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional/administrative Application / Judgment on Preliminary Objections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants have locus standi to bring the application
  2. 2 Whether the matter is urgent
  3. 3 Whether there was non-joinder of necessary parties

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants have locus standi as card-carrying members supported by a petition, but the application is not urgent due to inordinate and unexplained delay since the cause of action arose in 2008 and applicants only acted in 2011.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for lack of urgency; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Rule nisi discharged
  • Each party to bear its own costs