Lesotho Co-operative Handicrafts Ltd v Commission of Inquiry into Cooperatives (CIV/APN/471/93; C of A (CIV) 1/94) [1994] LSCA 126 (28 July 1994)

Lesotho Co-operative Handicrafts Ltd v Commission of Inquiry into Cooperatives (CIV/APN/471/93; C of A (CIV) 1/94) [1994] LSCA 126 (28 July 1994)

The refusal by the Commission to allow the appellants' attorney to cross-examine the Minister, after allowing cross-examination of other witnesses, constituted a discriminatory and unjustifiable departure from the principles of natural justice and fair hearing. This irregularity prejudiced the appellants and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1994] LSCA 126
Parties
1st Appellant: Lesotho Co-operative Handicrafts Ltd; 2nd Appellant: Lesotho Poultry Co-operative Union Ltd; 3rd Appellant: Leribe District Co-operative Union Ltd; 4th Appellant: Phela-u-Pheli Se Co-operative Union Ltd; 5th Appellant: Mafeteng District Co-operative Union Ltd; Respondent: The Commission of Inquiry into Cooperatives
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Case Number
CIV/APN/471/93 ; C of A (CIV) 1/94
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Natural Justice, Right to Fair Hearing, Commissions of Inquiry, Cross Examination
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Natural Justice Right to Fair Hearing Commissions of Inquiry Cross Examination

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lesotho Co-operative Handicrafts Ltd

1st Appellant

Lesotho Poultry Co-operative Union Ltd

2nd Appellant

Leribe District Co-operative Union Ltd

3rd Appellant

Phela-u-Pheli Se Co-operative Union Ltd

4th Appellant

Mafeteng District Co-operative Union Ltd

5th Appellant

The Commission of Inquiry into Cooperatives

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether refusal to allow cross-examination of a key witness before a Commission of Inquiry constituted a breach of natural justice and fair hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal by the Commission to allow the appellants' attorney to cross-examine the Minister, after allowing cross-examination of other witnesses, constituted a discriminatory and unjustifiable departure from the principles of natural justice and fair hearing. This irregularity prejudiced the appellants and amounted to a failure of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that the refusal to allow cross-examination of the Minister constituted an irregularity and prevented a fair hearing before the Commission.
  • Respondent to pay costs of suit.