Pitso Pitso V Principal Secretary- Ministry of Public Works & 3 Others (CCA/0125/2020) [2025] LSHC 196 (14 August 2025)

Pitso Pitso V Principal Secretary- Ministry of Public Works & 3 Others (CCA/0125/2020) [2025] LSHC 196 (14 August 2025)

The contract was one of independent contractor, not employment. The applicant was entitled to payment for work done, and the respondents' reliance on Public Service Commission procedures was misplaced. The applicant is entitled to contractual damages for breach of contract.

Citation
[2025] LSHC 196
Parties
Applicant: Pitso James Pitso; 1st Respondent: Principal Secretary – Public Works; 2nd Respondent: Minister of Public Works; 3rd Respondent: Director Building Design Services; 4th Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
14 August 2025
Case Number
CCA/0125/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (contractual Claim) / Judgment After Opposed Motion
Outcome
Judgment for the applicant
Legal Topics
Independent Contractor Vs Employee, Breach of Contract, Damages
Source Language
English
Contract Law Independent Contractor Vs Employee Breach of Contract Damages

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pitso James Pitso

Applicant

Principal Secretary – Public Works

1st Respondent

Minister of Public Works

2nd Respondent

Director Building Design Services

3rd Respondent

The Attorney General

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (contractual Claim) / Judgment After Opposed Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract was one of employment or independent contractor
  2. 2 Whether the termination of the contract was lawful or a breach of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The contract was one of independent contractor, not employment. The applicant was entitled to payment for work done, and the respondents' reliance on Public Service Commission procedures was misplaced. The applicant is entitled to contractual damages for breach of contract.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the applicant

Orders

  • The 2nd Respondent shall pay the Applicant damages in the amount of M349,573.36 plus costs of suit.