Sekhobe Lerotholi V Tebello Nkune (CCT/0396/2022) [2025] LSHC 119 (30 May 2025)

Sekhobe Lerotholi V Tebello Nkune (CCT/0396/2022) [2025] LSHC 119 (30 May 2025)

The contract of sale was not subject to an express exclusion of liability for latent defects. The engine had a latent defect impairing its utility, justifying cancellation and refund under actio redhibitoria. The counterclaim failed for lack of evidence and merit. Costs awarded on the Magistrate’s Court scale due to improper forum selection.

Citation
[2025] LSHC 119
Parties
Plaintiff in Main Action, Defendant in Counterclaim: Sekhobe Lerotholi; Defendant in Main Action, Plaintiff in Counterclaim: Tebello Nkune
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
30 May 2025
Case Number
CCT/0396/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract of Sale / Judgment After Trial, Including Counterclaim
Outcome
Plaintiff’s main action succeeds; contract cancelled and refund ordered. Counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Latent Defects, Voetstoots Clause, Actio Redhibitoria, Jurisdiction and Costs
Source Language
English
Contract Law Commercial Law Sale of Goods Latent Defects Voetstoots Clause Actio Redhibitoria Jurisdiction and Costs

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sekhobe Lerotholi

Plaintiff in Main Action, Defendant in Counterclaim

Tebello Nkune

Defendant in Main Action, Plaintiff in Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract of Sale / Judgment After Trial, Including Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract of sale for the Isuzu engine should be cancelled due to latent defects
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the purchase price
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is entitled to the balance of the purchase price and damages in the counterclaim

Ratio Decidendi

The contract of sale was not subject to an express exclusion of liability for latent defects. The engine had a latent defect impairing its utility, justifying cancellation and refund under actio redhibitoria. The counterclaim failed for lack of evidence and merit. Costs awarded on the Magistrate’s Court scale due to improper forum selection.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff’s main action succeeds; contract cancelled and refund ordered. Counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Main action succeeds with costs in terms of Prayer 1.
  • Costs on the Magistrate Court scale.