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
Basotho Convention Movement & Ano. V The Commissioner of Police & 17 Others (C of A (CIV) No.32/2025) [2025] LSCA 59 (7 November 2025)
Lesotho Court of Appeal held it lacked jurisdiction over foreign states and the UN, but faulted the High Court for not addressing domestic authorities.
Lesotho College of Education Staff Union V The Governing Council-Lesotho College of Education & 4 Others (CIV/APN/0175/2024) [2024] LSHC 119 (23 July 2024)
The High Court of Lesotho dismissed a staff union’s application over the Rector recruitment process, finding the applicant lacked locus standi to seek the reliefs.
Moroesi Tau-Thabane V 'Malisema Ramashamole & 2 Others (CIV/A/0007/2022) [2023] LSHC 127 (29 September 2023)
The Magistrate Court erred in holding it lacked jurisdiction as the relief sought was a prohibitory interdict, not dependent on the value of the estate or renovations. The onus to prove lack of jurisdiction was not discharged by the first respondent. The court a quo further erred in upholding non-joinder as the testamentary executors had no direct and substantial interest without letters of administration. It was also wrong for the court to grant relief not sought and to proceed after finding it lacked jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
Rampooana V The Fist National Bank of Lesotho (CCA/0073/2022) [2023] LSHC 132 (3 August 2023)
The bank had no statutory or contractual authority to freeze the 1st applicant’s account or reverse the funds absent a court order; its obligations were limited to reporting suspicious transactions. The 3rd applicant had standing due to its interest in the funds, but the 2nd applicant did not.
Source excerpt
Tholo Energy (Pty) Ltd v Tlelai (CCA/0008/2023) [2023] LSHC 24 (4 May 2023)
Urgent interdict application granted after the respondent interfered with a subleased filling station and raised only points of law without an answering affidavit.
Hata Butle (Pty) Ltd v Khoete (CCA/0022/2017) [2023] LSHC 4 (7 March 2023)
Contempt was proven against 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 7th Respondents. 1st Respondent was party to and aware of the order; 2nd and 3rd Respondents acted under his authority by entering into sublease agreements in violation of the order. 7th Respondent was notified but did not comply. No evidence against 4th to 6th Respondents. Misjoinder, lis pendens, and non-joinder arguments failed. Dispute of fact was not material to the contempt issue.
Source excerpt
Ha Seotsanayana (Pty) Ltd v Litjotjela Mall (Pty) Ltd (CCA/0053/2021) [2023] LSHC 16 (28 February 2023)
The sublease agreement is null and void for lack of registration and statutory consent, and cannot found rights or be enforced. The applicant failed to substantiate a claim for lien due to lack of evidence of enrichment and impoverishment. However, as a bona fide occupier, the applicant is entitled to protection by interdict against unlawful interference with its possession, pending due process of law.
Source excerpt
Khasoane T/a Molemo Bricks v Letseng Diamond (CCA/0117/2022) [2022] LSHC 161 (23 November 2022)
The applicant failed to demonstrate genuine urgency as he could be afforded substantial redress in due course, specifically through a claim for damages. The application was an abuse of court process due to undue haste and lack of justification for urgency.
Source excerpt
Matela v Lesotho Telecommunicatios Authority (C of A (CIV) 46/2022) [2022] LSCA 39 (11 November 2022)
The Court of Appeal confirmed that the High Court had jurisdiction to hear an interdict application, dismissed the appeal, and remitted the matter for the remaining issues.
Sehlabo v Puma Energy Ls (Pty) Ltd (C OF A (CIV) 37/2022) [2022] LSCA 44 (11 November 2022)
The Court of Appeal of Lesotho upheld an interdict restoring access to a filling station after a disruptive takeover attempt by the 1st appellant.
Explore more
