Teboho Liau V Director General NSS & 4 Others (CIV/APN/0251/2022) [2022] LSHC 285 (7 November 2022)

Teboho Liau V Director General NSS & 4 Others (CIV/APN/0251/2022) [2022] LSHC 285 (7 November 2022)

The court found that the disciplinary tribunal and the Minister applied their minds to the issues, considered all relevant evidence, and followed due process. There were no irregularities or unlawfulness in the proceedings. The decision was reasonable and not reviewable on the grounds advanced by the applicant.

Citation
[2022] LSHC 285
Parties
Applicant: Teboho Liau; 1st Respondent: Director General of National Security Service; 2nd Respondent: Minister of Defence and National Security Service; 3rd Respondent: National Security Service; 4th Respondent: Board of Inquiry; 5th Respondent: Attorney General of the Kingdom of Lesotho
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
7 November 2022
Case Number
CIV/APN/0251/2022
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Disciplinary Proceedings, Natural Justice, Unreasonableness, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Employment Law Judicial Review Disciplinary Proceedings Natural Justice Unreasonableness Procedural Fairness

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Teboho Liau

Applicant

Director General of National Security Service

1st Respondent

Minister of Defence and National Security Service

2nd Respondent

National Security Service

3rd Respondent

Board of Inquiry

4th Respondent

Attorney General of the Kingdom of Lesotho

5th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disciplinary tribunal failed to apply its mind to the relevant issues and facts in accordance with the statute and natural justice
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was prejudiced by the refusal to subpoena a witness
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the disciplinary tribunal and the Minister applied their minds to the issues, considered all relevant evidence, and followed due process. There were no irregularities or unlawfulness in the proceedings. The decision was reasonable and not reviewable on the grounds advanced by the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • Costs de bonis propriis against Advocate Thakalekoala on an attorney and client scale.