Morebotsane and Others v Masentle High School and Others (CIV/T 532 of 2012) [2013] LSHC 4 (21 January 2013)

Morebotsane and Others v Masentle High School and Others (CIV/T 532 of 2012) [2013] LSHC 4 (21 January 2013)

The Magistrate's Court failed to observe the principles of natural justice by not affording the applicants a hearing before authorizing their transfers, and acted irregularly by addressing some prayers while lacking jurisdiction over others. The decision was set aside on review for want of proper procedure and maintenance of legality.

Citation
[2013] LSHC 4
Parties
Applicant: Mamathunya Morebotsane; Applicant: Julia Jane; Applicant: Puleng Potsane; Applicant: Ithabeleng Sehlatsane; Applicant: Lieketseng Shaabe; Respondent: 'Masentle High School; Respondent: Schools Board Masentle High School; Respondent: Catholic Schools Secretariat; Respondent: Teaching Service Commission; Respondent: Teaching Service Department; Respondent: Ministry of Education and Training; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Magistrate Court Mafeteng
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
21 January 2013
Case Number
CIV/T 532 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Review / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review allowed; Magistrate's decision set aside and substituted.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Natural Justice, Jurisdiction, Teacher Transfers
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Education Law Judicial Review Natural Justice Jurisdiction Teacher Transfers

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mamathunya Morebotsane

Applicant

Julia Jane

Applicant

Puleng Potsane

Applicant

Ithabeleng Sehlatsane

Applicant

Lieketseng Shaabe

Applicant

'Masentle High School

Respondent

Schools Board Masentle High School

Respondent

Catholic Schools Secretariat

Respondent

Teaching Service Commission

Respondent

Teaching Service Department

Respondent

Ministry of Education and Training

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Magistrate Court Mafeteng

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Magistrate's Court followed proper procedure in authorizing teacher transfers and restraining orders
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were denied natural justice by not being heard before transfer
  3. 3 Whether the Magistrate's Court had jurisdiction to make declaratory orders

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate's Court failed to observe the principles of natural justice by not affording the applicants a hearing before authorizing their transfers, and acted irregularly by addressing some prayers while lacking jurisdiction over others. The decision was set aside on review for want of proper procedure and maintenance of legality.

Court Disposition

Application for review allowed; Magistrate's decision set aside and substituted.

Orders

  • Rule in the main application discharged.
  • Rule in the counter application confirmed with costs.