Lerata v Kalanyane and Others (CIV/APN 120 of 95) [1995] LSCA 116 (9 August 1995)
The magistrate's court exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding damages above the statutory limit, making the judgment irregular and subject to being set aside.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] LSCA 116
- Parties
- Applicant: Motake Lerata; 1st Respondent: Chere Kalanyane; 2nd Respondent: Magistrate of Ty; 3rd Respondent: Messenger of Court (Ty)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Lesotho
- Case Number
- CIV/APN 120 of 95
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction, Default Judgment, Damages
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Motake Lerata
Applicant
Chere Kalanyane
1st Respondent
Magistrate of Ty
2nd Respondent
Messenger of Court (Ty)
3rd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the magistrate's court exceeded its jurisdiction in awarding damages by default judgment
- 2 Whether the default judgment was irregular and in contravention of statutory provisions
Ratio Decidendi
The magistrate's court exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding damages above the statutory limit, making the judgment irregular and subject to being set aside.
Court Disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- Proceedings and warrant of execution set aside
- Other prayers confirmed in terms of 1(a)-(e)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CIV/APN/120/95 IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO In the matter between : MOTAKE LERATA va CHERE KALANYANE MAGISTRATE OF TY MESSENGER OF COURT (TY) Applicant 1st Respondent 2nd Respondent 3rd Respondent JUDGMENT Delivered by the Honourable Mr. Justice T. Monapathi on the 9th day of August, 1995 The magistrate's court's award of damages by default judgment of the 16th December 1994 in cc82/94 was irregular and in contravention of sections 17 and 26 of Subordinate Courts Order No. 9/88, There is only one claim but many heads and one cause of action. The claim exceeds M10.000.00 being the upper limit of the jurisdiction of that Court. See also M. LETSIE vs M. MONYANE & 2 Others CIV\APN\23\93 per W. C. M. Maqutu J (27\09\94). The presiding magistrate also exceeded his jurisdiction of M7.000.00 . The judgment was irregular and it ought to be set aside. The application is allowed, the proceedings and warrant of Execution are set aside and other prayers confirmed in terms of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) and (e). which is for costs to the Applicant. T. MONAPATHI 9th August, 1995 For the Applicant ; Mr. Phoofolo For the Respondents : Mr. Khauoe