Thabiso Tsehla & Ano. V Rethabile Jonathan (CCT/0568/2021) [2025] LSHC 87 (10 April 2025)

Thabiso Tsehla & Ano. V Rethabile Jonathan (CCT/0568/2021) [2025] LSHC 87 (10 April 2025)

The contract is enforceable because the plaintiffs did not know and could not reasonably have known that the defendant was married, the property was registered solely in the defendant’s name, and the defendant’s ex-wife was compensated and did not challenge the transaction. The defendant cannot rely on lack of spousal consent to avoid the contract when the statutory deeming provision applies and the non-contracting spouse is not interested in challenging the sale.

Citation
[2025] LSHC 87
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Thabiso Tšehla; 2nd Plaintiff: ‘Mabafokeng Tšehla; Defendant: Rethabile Robert Jonathan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
10 April 2025
Case Number
CCT/0568/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil (property/contract) / Judgment After Trial of Main Action and Counterclaim
Outcome
Plaintiffs' main action succeeds with costs; counterclaim dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Alienation of Joint Estate Property, Spousal Consent, Specific Performance, Validity of Contract Without Spousal Consent, Adjustment Upon Division of Joint Estate
Source Language
English
Property Law Family Law Contract Law Alienation of Joint Estate Property Spousal Consent Specific Performance Validity of Contract Without Spousal Consent Adjustment Upon Division of Joint Estate

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thabiso Tšehla

1st Plaintiff

‘Mabafokeng Tšehla

2nd Plaintiff

Rethabile Robert Jonathan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property/contract) / Judgment After Trial of Main Action and Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contract for sale of immovable property by a spouse without the other spouse's consent is enforceable against the contracting spouse when the innocent third party did not know or could not reasonably have known of the marriage
  2. 2 Whether the defendant can resist enforcement or seek cancellation of the contract on grounds of lack of spousal consent when the non-contracting spouse is not interested in challenging the transaction

Ratio Decidendi

The contract is enforceable because the plaintiffs did not know and could not reasonably have known that the defendant was married, the property was registered solely in the defendant’s name, and the defendant’s ex-wife was compensated and did not challenge the transaction. The defendant cannot rely on lack of spousal consent to avoid the contract when the statutory deeming provision applies and the non-contracting spouse is not interested in challenging the sale.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' main action succeeds with costs; counterclaim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Defendant is ordered to perform in terms of the agreement signed on 11 January 2014 by causing, facilitating and/or effecting the transfer of site under lease No. 12293-419 to the plaintiffs by signing consent application and deed of transfer and to perform all other requirements under the law within a month from...
  • Counterclaim is dismissed with costs.