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
Maema v The Rosehip Company (LC 28 of 2015) [2015] LSLC 50 (31 August 2015)
The Labour Court of Lesotho found an employee’s retrenchment unfair, rejected an unauthorised postponement request, and awarded compensation, notice pay, and severance.
Makatsela v Econet Telecom Lesotho (LC 23 of 2011) [2015] LSLC 48 (10 August 2015)
The Labour Court of Lesotho held that Makatsela’s retrenchment was fair, but ordered Econet-Telecom Lesotho to pay unpaid pension benefits.
Moletsane and Another v Population Services International (LC 3 of 2012) [2015] LSLC 41 (10 August 2015)
The Respondent failed to consult the Applicant on the new structure that led to his retrenchment and did not provide a valid reason for eliminating his position. This constituted both procedural and substantive unfairness, entitling the Applicant to compensation.
Source excerpt
Mokuena v Stallion Security (LC 47 of 2012) [2015] LSLC 51 (10 August 2015)
The Labour Court of Lesotho held that Bokang Mokuena’s dismissal by Stallion Security for operational reasons was both substantively and procedurally unfair.
Johane v Christian Council of Lesotho and Another (LC/REV 54 of 13) [2015] LSLC 18 (13 February 2015)
The applicant's contract was a fixed term contract that expired by effluxion of time as stipulated in the contract and Section 62(3) of the Labour Code Order, 1992. The employer's reference to lack of funds did not convert the termination into a dismissal for operational requirements. No legitimate expectation of renewal was established, and no procedural irregularity occurred in the arbitral proceedings.
Source excerpt
Makafane v Zhongxian Investment Pty Ltd and Another (LC 76 of 2013) [2014] LSLC 36 (11 July 2014)
The Labour Court held that Makamohelo Makafane’s dismissal was unfair because it was based on pregnancy, not operational requirements, and ordered reinstatement.
Libe Motholo and Others v Thetsane Hardware Building Material (Pty) Ltd (LC 45 of 2012) [2013] LSLC 70 (11 November 2013)
Given the respondent's financial loss and the need to balance the interests of both former and current employees, compensation is to be paid in six instalments equal to the applicants' last monthly salaries.
Source excerpt
FAWU O.BO. Thandiwe Labane and Others (LC 52 of 12) [2013] LSLC 22 (27 May 2013)
The applicant union lacked locus standi as it did not have a sufficiently direct and substantial interest in the subject matter; only the dismissed employees were directly affected. Without locus standi, there was no proper applicant before the court, making joinder and substitution applications unsustainable. Substitution from the bar breached procedural rules, and no sufficient grounds for condonation were provided.
Source excerpt
Mabitle v Unitrans Lesotho (Pty) Ltd (LC 47 of 10) [2011] LSLC 25 (26 May 2011)
The Labour Court held that a dismissal said to protect a subcontract was not an operational-requirements dismissal. The unfair dismissal claim belonged before the DDPR.
Lepolesa and Others v Sun International of Lesotho (Pty) Ltd t/a Maseru Sun and Lesotho Sun (Pty) Ltd (LAC/CIV 3 of 2010) [2011] LSLAC 4 (2 February 2011)
The Labour Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter because the statutory requirement of prior conciliation before the DDPR was not met; the referral relied upon by the appellants concerned different parties and subject matter, and was made before the actual dismissal occurred.
Source excerpt
Explore more
