Masupha v Masupha (CIV/APN/246/2017) [2022] LSHC 15 (10 March 2022)

Masupha v Masupha (CIV/APN/246/2017) [2022] LSHC 15 (10 March 2022)

The 1st Respondent failed to provide a cogent, reasonable, and acceptable explanation for the late filing of his answering affidavit, and the application for condonation was dismissed. The Minister's advice to the King is reviewable, and the King need not be joined where he acts on ministerial advice. The applicant established entitlement to the chieftainship, and the Minister's recommendation and the government notice were set aside.

Citation
[2022] LSHC 15
Parties
Applicant: Makoae Masupha; 1st Respondent: Molefi Libe Masupha; 2nd Respondent: Principal Chief – Ha ’Mamathe; 3rd Respondent: Minister of Local Government & Chieftainship Affairs; 4th Respondent: Attorney General
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
10 March 2022
Case Number
CIV/APN/246/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment After Hearing on Merits and Interlocutory Application for Condonation
Outcome
Application allowed; interlocutory application for condonation dismissed; substantive relief granted to applicant.
Legal Topics
Chieftainship Succession, Judicial Review, Condonation of Late Filing, Non Joinder, Declaratory Relief
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Customary Law Chieftainship Succession Judicial Review Condonation of Late Filing Non Joinder Declaratory Relief

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Makoae Masupha

Applicant

Molefi Libe Masupha

1st Respondent

Principal Chief – Ha ’Mamathe

2nd Respondent

Minister of Local Government & Chieftainship Affairs

3rd Respondent

Attorney General

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment After Hearing on Merits and Interlocutory Application for Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should condone the late filing of the answering affidavit by the 1st Respondent
  2. 2 Whether the King must be joined in proceedings challenging a legal notice made pursuant to section 14(2) of the Chieftainship Act
  3. 3 Whether the Minister's advice to the King regarding chieftainship succession is reviewable

Ratio Decidendi

The 1st Respondent failed to provide a cogent, reasonable, and acceptable explanation for the late filing of his answering affidavit, and the application for condonation was dismissed. The Minister's advice to the King is reviewable, and the King need not be joined where he acts on ministerial advice. The applicant established entitlement to the chieftainship, and the Minister's recommendation and the government notice were set aside.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; interlocutory application for condonation dismissed; substantive relief granted to applicant.

Orders

  • The decision of the Minister of Chieftainship Affairs to recommend Molefi Libe Masupha as Chief of Sefikeng Ha Fako is reviewed and set aside.
  • Government Notice No. 37 of 2001 declaring Molefi Libe Masupha as Chief is set aside.