Motlatsi Mapola V COMPOL & 2 Others (CIV/APN/0008/2023) [2024] LSHC 77 (26 April 2024)

Motlatsi Mapola V COMPOL & 2 Others (CIV/APN/0008/2023) [2024] LSHC 77 (26 April 2024)

On a balance of probabilities, the evidence (including a letter from the Human Resource Office and a payslip from 2020) showed the employer was aware of the applicant's date of birth as 8th December 1968. The decision to retire the applicant based on 8th March 1968 was incorrect and must be set aside.

Citation
[2024] LSHC 77
Parties
Applicant: Motlatsi Mapola; 1st Respondent: Commissioner of Police; 2nd Respondent: Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Employment; 3rd Respondent: Attorney General
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
26 April 2024
Case Number
CIV/APN/0008/2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Employment Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed in part; decision of 1st Respondent set aside; applicant's date of birth declared as 8th December 1968; retirement date adjusted; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics
Compulsory Retirement, Date of Birth Dispute, Public Service, Evidence of Age
Source Language
English
Employment Law Administrative Law Compulsory Retirement Date of Birth Dispute Public Service Evidence of Age

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Motlatsi Mapola

Applicant

Commissioner of Police

1st Respondent

Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Employment

2nd Respondent

Attorney General

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Employment Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's correct date of birth is 8th December 1968 or 8th March 1968 for purposes of compulsory retirement.

Ratio Decidendi

On a balance of probabilities, the evidence (including a letter from the Human Resource Office and a payslip from 2020) showed the employer was aware of the applicant's date of birth as 8th December 1968. The decision to retire the applicant based on 8th March 1968 was incorrect and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; decision of 1st Respondent set aside; applicant's date of birth declared as 8th December 1968; retirement date adjusted; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • Decision of 1st Respondent regarding date of birth set aside.
  • Applicant's date of birth declared as 8th December 1968.