Lefosa v Mooki (CIV/APN 326 of 11) [2013] LSHC 107 (10 July 2013)

Lefosa v Mooki (CIV/APN 326 of 11) [2013] LSHC 107 (10 July 2013)

The respondent is a mala fide occupier, having entered into the relationship with knowledge of an existing valid marriage, and cannot benefit from her own wrongdoing. She has not prosecuted her claims for improvements or damages, has benefited from rental income, and cannot frustrate a valid court order for ejectment. The only remedy available is a claim for damages, not a right of retention or continued occupation.

Citation
[2013] LSHC 107
Parties
Applicant: Thato Lefosa; Respondent: ‘Maneo Doris Mooki
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
10 July 2013
Case Number
CIV/APN 326 of 11
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application succeeds with costs.
Legal Topics
Lien, Ejectment, Improvements to Property, Bona Fide and Mala Fide Occupier, Enrichment, Execution of Judgment
Source Language
English
Property Law Civil Procedure Lien Ejectment Improvements to Property Bona Fide and Mala Fide Occupier Enrichment Execution of Judgment

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thato Lefosa

Applicant

‘Maneo Doris Mooki

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has a right of lien over the property for improvements made
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is a bona fide or mala fide occupier
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be ejected from the property

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent is a mala fide occupier, having entered into the relationship with knowledge of an existing valid marriage, and cannot benefit from her own wrongdoing. She has not prosecuted her claims for improvements or damages, has benefited from rental income, and cannot frustrate a valid court order for ejectment. The only remedy available is a claim for damages, not a right of retention or continued occupation.

Court Disposition

Application succeeds with costs.

Orders

  • Respondent to be ejected from the property.
  • Costs awarded to the applicant.