Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Lesotho decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Thabelang Moeketsi & 2 Others V Lesotho General Insurance Co. Ltd (C of A (CIV) 48/2025) [2025] LSCA 72 (7 November 2025)
The Court of Appeal held the appellants lacked locus standi to challenge section 8 of the Motor Vehicle Insurance Order 1989, so the appeal was dismissed.
Mathabo Mphale V Public Service Commission & 2 Others (C of A (CIV) 72/2024) [2025] LSCA 31 (2 May 2025)
The refusal to regrade the appellant was irrational because she functionally performed the duties of a head of department and was similarly situated to Chief Legal Officers who were upgraded under the same circular. The High Court erred by focusing on nomenclature rather than functions, resulting in unjustifiable unequal treatment.
Source excerpt
Moeketsi Lekau & 8 Others V MInistry of Public Service (CIV/APN/458/2021) [2024] LSHC 222 (13 November 2024)
The High Court of Lesotho dismissed a challenge to public service grading changes, finding Grade H in the Human Resources cadre was never abolished.
Molikuoa Sekhonyana V P.S Ministry of Public Service & 4 Others (CIV/APN/0300/2022) [2024] LSHC 229 (13 September 2024)
The High Court of Lesotho dismissed a judicial review challenge to public service job grading, finding no discrimination or irrationality in regrading the applicants to Grade I.
Tlokotsi v Director of Public Prosecutions (Const. No. 14/2019) [2022] LSHC 169 (15 December 2022)
The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to establish exceptional circumstances justifying collateral constitutional proceedings, did not demonstrate that the PAC's actions resulted in a violation of their fair trial rights, and did not bring their discrimination claim within the ambit of section 18(3) of the Constitution. The DCEO acted within its statutory mandate, and the PAC's summoning of the DPP was void ab initio but did not affect the prosecution. Declaratory relief was not warranted as it would have no practical effect.
Source excerpt
Jappie Catering v Ministry of Health (CCA/0113/2022) [2022] LSHC 170 (15 November 2022)
Applicant failed to establish urgency as business loss does not justify preferential treatment; failed to prove a prima facie right or irreparable harm as contract had expired and no constitutional discrimination was shown; interim interdict requirements not met.
Source excerpt
Alotsi v Commander of the Lesotho Defence Force (CIV/APN/325/2021) [2022] LSHC 104 (31 August 2022)
The court found that the summary trial and discharge process complied with the requirements of natural justice and the relevant statutory provisions. The Commander acted within the powers conferred by Section 31 of the Lesotho Defence Force Act, 1996. Discharge following conviction and sentence does not amount to double jeopardy, as it is an administrative decision in the best interests of the Defence Force, not a second punishment.
Source excerpt
The Principal Secretary, Ministry of Public Service v Tsupane (C of A (CIV); CONST CASE 11) [2020] LSCA 25 (30 October 2020)
The differentiation in grading between Ministerial Secretaries and Executive Secretaries was based on objectively determinable differences in their conditions of service, including contract terms, job security, and duties. The applicants failed to establish that the differentiation was based on a constitutionally prohibited ground or that it amounted to unfair discrimination under sections 18 and 19 of the Constitution. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's order set aside.
Source excerpt
Ramohlanka v Prime Minister (CONSTITUTIONAL CASE 2 of 2020) [2020] LSHC 33 (2 July 2020)
High Court of Lesotho held that recovering loan payments from former Principal Secretaries, while excusing similarly placed parliamentarians, was unconstitutional discrimination.
Tsupane v Principal Secretary - Ministry of Public Service (CONSTITUTIONAL CASE 12 of 2018) [2020] LSHC 10 (5 March 2020)
The exclusion of Executive Secretaries from the salary upgrade under Circular No.4 of 2007 constitutes unfair discrimination based on status, as their functions and qualifications are at least equal to those of Ministerial Secretaries. The differentiation was arbitrary, lacked rational justification, and violated sections 18(2) and (3) of the Constitution of Lesotho.
Source excerpt
Explore more
