Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Lesotho decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
Mothusi Sello & 4 Others V Director of Public Prosecution (C of A (CRI) No 10/2024) [2024] LSCA 45 (1 November 2024)
The Court of Appeal of Lesotho dismissed a bail appeal in a common-purpose murder case, holding that the appellants failed to show exceptional circumstances.
Lehlohonolo Masienyane & Ano. V Maluti Mountain Brewery & Ano. (C of A (CIV) No 27/2024) [2024] LSCA 24 (1 November 2024)
The house was repairable and not a total loss; damages must be based on repair costs, not replacement. Emotional distress and inconvenience are not compensable under actio legis Aquiliae without psychiatric evidence. The High Court's estimate of M300,000.00 for damages was reasonable given the evidence and delay, and no material error or misdirection was found.
Source excerpt
Masechaba Matekane V Selloane Mosielle & 7 Others (C of A (CIV) No 12/2024) [2024] LSCA 18 (1 November 2024)
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against refusal of a recusal application, holding that the judge’s school connection did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias.
Liteboho Ramakhula & Ano. V The Chairperson-Mafeteng Urban Council & & Others (C of A (CIV) No 08/2024) [2024] LSCA 14 (1 November 2024)
The High Court erred in declining jurisdiction and refusing mandamus; once the threshold requirements under Regulation 44 are met, the allocating authority must process the nomination and objections, and the issue of heirship is to be determined through that process, not as a precondition.
Source excerpt
Malerato Khutlisi T/A Shelly Brown Car Wash V The Officer Commanding Counter Commercial Crime Unit & 4 Others (C of A (CIV) No 50/2024) [2024] LSCA 37 (1 November 2024)
The Lesotho Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a preservation order, holding that the exclusion application was late and rescission was not shown to be in the interests of justice.
Lesotho Communications Authority V Mamarame Matela & 3 Others (CIV/APN/0120/2022) [2024] LSHC 167 (31 October 2024)
The applicant’s witnesses were credible and corroborated each other that the first respondent took the laptop, iPad, and voice recorder. The first respondent’s explanations were inconsistent and not credible. The applicant discharged the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities that the first respondent has the applicant’s property and must return them.
Source excerpt
Malefetsane Tlali V Retselisitsoe Phoofolo & 2 Others (LC/A/17/2019) [2024] LSHC 22 (30 October 2024)
Regulations 43 and 44 of Land Regulations, 2011 do not apply to claims for compensation arising from expropriation, as expropriation extinguishes title and only compensation rights accrue; the court a quo erred by focusing on inheritance compliance instead of entitlement to compensation.
Source excerpt
Lerotholi Polytechnic V Mabula Khetheng (CIV/T/515/2016) [2024] LSHC 228 (25 October 2024)
The defendant was not entitled to file the plea without seeking removal of the bar and extension of time under Rule 26(6). The plea filed on 16 July 2020 is an irregular step and must be set aside.
Source excerpt
Makibinyane Mohapeloa V Limpho Mohapeloa & 5 Others (LC/APN/0016/2023) [2024] LSHC 245 (25 October 2024)
The applicant’s claim is vindicatory in nature, asserting ownership rights and seeking restoration of possession or compensation for market value, not arising from a commercial or business relationship. The Land Court has jurisdiction to hear the dispute. The preliminary objection is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Nonkululeko Zally V The Prime Minister & 3 Others (CIV/APN/0012/2023) [2024] LSHC 200 (18 October 2024)
The Prime Minister's decision to terminate the Applicant's contract was based on perceived misconduct and breach of trust, thus requiring procedural fairness and a hearing; failure to afford a hearing rendered the termination unlawful.
Source excerpt
Explore more
