Letseng Diamond (PTY) Ltd V The President of the Law Society of Lesotho (CCA 19 of 2022) [2023] LSHC 213 (11 May 2023)

Letseng Diamond (PTY) Ltd V The President of the Law Society of Lesotho (CCA 19 of 2022) [2023] LSHC 213 (11 May 2023)

The parties’ agreement expressly provided for the Law Society of Lesotho to appoint the arbitrator, thereby excluding the Secretariat of AFSA from the appointment process. The procedural steps under the AFSA Rules were intended to be performed by the Law Society, not AFSA. There was no procedural or substantive irregularity justifying court intervention under sections 4 or 14 of the Arbitration Act. The interlocutory application was dismissed for being prejudicial, non-compliant, and based on hearsay evidence.

Citation
[2023] LSHC 213
Parties
Applicant: Letšeng Diamonds (Pty) Ltd; 1st Respondent: The President of the Law Society of Lesotho; 2nd Respondent: Advocate Patric Vusimusi Tšenoli N. O (“The Arbitrator”); 3rd Respondent: Tholo Energy Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
11 May 2023
Case Number
CCA 19 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Application (review and Interlocutory) / Judgment After Hearing on Interlocutory Application and Main Review Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses, Appointment of Arbitrator, Procedural Compliance in Arbitration, Review of Arbitral Appointments
Source Language
English
Arbitration Commercial Law Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses Appointment of Arbitrator Procedural Compliance in Arbitration Review of Arbitral Appointments

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Letšeng Diamonds (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

The President of the Law Society of Lesotho

1st Respondent

Advocate Patric Vusimusi Tšenoli N. O (“The Arbitrator”)

2nd Respondent

Tholo Energy Services (Pty) Ltd

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Application (review and Interlocutory) / Judgment After Hearing on Interlocutory Application and Main Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interlocutory application to file further evidence should be allowed
  2. 2 Whether the appointment of the arbitrator by the Law Society of Lesotho was procedurally and substantively compliant with the parties’ agreement and the AFSA Rules
  3. 3 Whether the court should set aside or review the referral to arbitration and/or the appointment of the arbitrator

Ratio Decidendi

The parties’ agreement expressly provided for the Law Society of Lesotho to appoint the arbitrator, thereby excluding the Secretariat of AFSA from the appointment process. The procedural steps under the AFSA Rules were intended to be performed by the Law Society, not AFSA. There was no procedural or substantive irregularity justifying court intervention under sections 4 or 14 of the Arbitration Act. The interlocutory application was dismissed for being prejudicial, non-compliant, and based on hearsay evidence.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.