Security Lesotho (Pty) Ltd v Lebohang Clement Moepa (LC/REV 21 of 2011) [2013] LSLC 47 (12 August 2013)

Security Lesotho (Pty) Ltd v Lebohang Clement Moepa (LC/REV 21 of 2011) [2013] LSLC 47 (12 August 2013)

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the default, and the continued existence of the counterclaim rendered the rescission application superfluous. The requirements for rescission were not met.

Citation
[2013] LSLC 47
Parties
Applicant: Security Lesotho (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Lebohang Clement Moepa
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
12 August 2013
Case Number
LC/REV 21 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Rescission / Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Review of Arbitral Award
Source Language
English
Labour Law Rescission of Judgment Default Judgment Review of Arbitral Award

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Security Lesotho (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Lebohang Clement Moepa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Rescission / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant met the requirements for rescission of judgment
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for default was satisfactory
  3. 3 Whether there were prospects of success in the main claim

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the default, and the continued existence of the counterclaim rendered the rescission application superfluous. The requirements for rescission were not met.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for rescission is dismissed.
  • The judgment of this Court issued on the 30th November 2012 is reinstated.