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
Ramakoala V Monts'o (CCA/0108/2021) [2023] LSHC 141 (14 September 2023)
The High Court of Lesotho dismissed a civil application because a material dispute of fact about valuation was foreseeable and unsuitable for motion proceedings.
Yao v Meriti Holdings (Pty) Ltd (CCA/0018/2019) [2022] LSHC 143 (27 October 2022)
The forfeiture of the applicant's shares was invalid due to failure to provide proper notice of meetings as required by the Companies Act and the company's articles. The notices were posted after the meetings, depriving the applicant of the opportunity to attend. The procedure for forfeiture was not followed, and the interlocutory application to resolve a dispute of fact was procedurally improper.
Source excerpt
Proaid Holdings Lesotho (Pty) Ltd v Alimela Thuto Financials Ltd (CCA/0095/2020) [2022] LSHC 140 (29 September 2022)
The Central Bank of Lesotho is a necessary party due to its statutory supervisory role and direct interest in shareholding changes. There is no genuine dispute of fact preventing determination on papers. However, the existence of a pending related matter (CCT/0209/20) between the same parties on the same issues (lis pendens) requires dismissal of the application to avoid conflicting judgments and multiplicity of litigation.
Source excerpt
Ntene v Freestate Management Trading Entity (CIV/APN 38 of 2019) [2021] LSHC 38 (22 April 2021)
The appeal was dismissed because the respondent failed to provide any satisfactory documentary proof of lawful ownership or possession as required by s.14(3) of the Motor Vehicle Theft Act. The evidence of the applicant, supported by expert and police affidavits, was overwhelming and unchallenged. The magistrate was correct to resolve the matter on affidavits, as viva voce evidence would not have disturbed the balance of probabilities. Affidavits sworn in South Africa were admissible without further authentication, and computer-generated evidence was properly admitted under the presumption of…
Source excerpt
Khabo v Khabo (C of A (CIV) 72 of 2018) [2019] LSCA 56 (1 November 2019)
There was a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the 1st appellant was in possession of the property at the material time. The High Court correctly identified this dispute, referred it to oral evidence, and, applying the Plascon-Evans rule, found the respondents' version prevailed. The appellants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they were in peaceful and undisturbed possession. The appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Du Preez v Pheko (CIV/APN 151 of 18) [2019] LSHC 24 (14 February 2019)
The High Court of Lesotho dismissed an inheritance challenge over site No. 112, finding the applicant had locus standi but failed to prove fraud amid factual disputes.
Mangoejane v Mangoejane (C of A (CIV) 43 of 2017) [2018] LSCA 15 (7 December 2018)
The 2nd appellant was improperly joined as no reason was given for her inclusion and she had no direct interest; the 1st respondent established ownership of the money in the founding affidavit; no real dispute of fact existed to warrant oral evidence, and the judge was entitled to decide the matter on the affidavits.
Source excerpt
Molibeli v Molibeli (C of A (CIV) 47 of 2016) [2018] LSCA 18 (7 December 2018)
Chobeliso (elopement) is not a form of customary marriage under Sesotho law. The requirements for a valid customary marriage, including parental agreement and payment of bohali, were not satisfied. The High Court erred in granting relief based on an invalid marriage. The application should have been dismissed due to irresoluble factual disputes and failure to meet legal requirements for marriage.
Source excerpt
Chen Yun Bo v Paballo Martin Theko and Others (C of A (CIV) 7 of 2014) [2014] LSCA 3 (17 April 2014)
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal and a stay of execution, holding the applicant could not raise new grounds not argued below.
Motlatsi Maseela and Others v Lesotho Footbal Association and Others (C of A (CIV) 23 of 2013) [2013] LSCA 36 (18 October 2013)
The Court of Appeal held that a material dispute of fact had to be resolved on the respondents’ version under Plascon-Evans, and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Explore more
