Esheria Lesotho Case Law
Sign in
Lesotho Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Lesotho Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Lesotho case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Lesotho decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal procedure [2023] LSHC 201

Makhotso Mahosi V DCEO & 2 Others (CIV/APN/0004/2023)

Makhotso Mahosi V DCEO & 2 Others (CIV/APN/0004/2023) [2023] LSHC 201 (27 September 2023)

Court
High Court
Case number
CIV/APN/0004/2023

The High Court is not the proper forum to determine the admissibility of evidence, voluntariness of admissions, or lawfulness of the search and seizure in the context of a civil application. These are matters for the trial court, which can test the evidence and credibility of witnesses through cross-examination. The application is therefore dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Search and seizure
  • Admissibility of evidence
  • Right to legal representation
  • Money laundering
  • Corruption
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2022] LSHC 107

Khoache v Magistrate for the District of Thaba-tseka (CRI/REV/0018/2021)

Khoache v Magistrate for the District of Thaba-tseka (CRI/REV/0018/2021) [2022] LSHC 107 (12 July 2022)

Court
High Court
Case number
CRI/REV/0018/2021

There were no fundamental irregularities or miscarriage of justice in the proceedings; the applicant was informed of his rights and the absence of a sworn interpreter or repeated advisement did not vitiate the trial.

Source excerpt

  • Review of criminal proceedings
  • Right to legal representation
  • Use of interpreter
  • Fair trial
  • Sexual offences
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2022] LSHC 151

Ntee v Director of Public Prosecution (CRI/S/0001/2020)

Ntee v Director of Public Prosecution (CRI/S/0001/2020) [2022] LSHC 151 (27 May 2022)

Court
High Court
Case number
CRI/S/0001/2020

The trial Magistrate's failure to adequately inform and facilitate the accused's right to legal representation, to ensure disclosure of prosecution witness statements, and to assist in cross-examination constituted serious irregularities that violated the accused's constitutional right to a fair trial, thereby vitiating the proceedings and requiring the conviction to be set aside and a new trial ordered.

Source excerpt

  • Right to fair trial
  • Right to legal representation
  • Disclosure of evidence
  • Cross-examination
  • Setting aside conviction
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2022] LSHC 41

Thakalekena v Tsosane (CRI/REV/0019/2021)

Thakalekena v Tsosane (CRI/REV/0019/2021) [2022] LSHC 41 (6 April 2022)

Court
High Court
Case number
CRI/REV/0019/2021

The High Court of Lesotho set aside a criminal conviction on review after finding the magistrate failed to warn an unrepresented accused about a serious charge and mandatory minimum sentence.

  • Aggravated assault
  • Minimum sentence
  • Unrepresented accused
  • Right to legal representation
  • Court interpreter
  • Criminal-review
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2017] LSCA 13

Leuta v Senior Resident Magistrate Berea & Others (C of A (CRI); CRI/REV 3)

Leuta v Senior Resident Magistrate Berea & Others (C of A (CRI); CRI/REV 3) [2017] LSCA 13 (12 May 2017)

Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
C of A (CRI) ; CRI/REV 3

The appellant's right to a fair trial was violated because he was not adequately informed of the seriousness of the charge, the compulsory minimum sentence, and the implications of pleading guilty before being called upon to decide on legal representation and to plead. The explanation given by the magistrate was insufficient, and the proceedings were therefore not fair.

Source excerpt

  • Fair trial rights
  • Sexual offences
  • Review of criminal proceedings
  • Right to legal representation
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2014] LSHC 83

Ratabane v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (CR/APN 307 of 2010)

Ratabane v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (CR/APN 307 of 2010) [2014] LSHC 83 (15 December 2014)

Court
High Court
Case number
CR/APN 307 of 2010

The applicant was properly informed of his rights to bail and legal representation, pleaded guilty, and accepted the facts. There was no miscarriage of justice, prejudice, or procedural irregularity warranting setting aside the proceedings. There is no legal obligation to specifically inform about Legal Aid Counsel unless circumstances indicate financial incapacity, which was not established.

Source excerpt

  • Right to fair trial
  • Right to legal representation
  • Judicial duty to inform accused of rights
  • Review of criminal conviction
Read case analysis
Employment law [2014] LSCA 18

Maluti Mountai Brewery (Pty) Ltd v Moeko Maboee (C of A (CIV) 51 of 2013)

Maluti Mountai Brewery (Pty) Ltd v Moeko Maboee (C of A (CIV) 51 of 2013) [2014] LSCA 18 (17 April 2014)

Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
C of A (CIV) 51 of 2013

The Court of Appeal held that legal representation at a disciplinary enquiry is for the tribunal’s discretion, but the challenge to the proceedings was dismissed with costs.

  • Disciplinary proceedings
  • Right to legal representation
  • Procedural fairness
  • Employment-law
  • Labour-law
  • Disciplinary-proceedings
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2014] LSHC 5

Principal Chief of Likhoele v Zulu Khotke and Others (CIV/APN 565 of 2011)

Principal Chief of Likhoele v Zulu Khotke and Others (CIV/APN 565 of 2011) [2014] LSHC 5 (20 February 2014)

Court
High Court
Case number
CIV/APN 565 of 2011

The High Court of Lesotho reviewed magistrate’s court proceedings and held it was irregular to deny the Principal Chief private counsel when the Attorney General had not been served.

  • Right to legal representation
  • Review of lower court proceedings
  • Right-to-legal-representation
  • Judicial-review
  • Civil-procedure
  • Government-proceedings-act
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2014] LSHC 53

Makoae v R (Review Case 139 of 2013)

Makoae v R (Review Case 139 of 2013) [2014] LSHC 53 (29 January 2014)

Court
High Court
Case number
Review Case 139 of 2013

The proceedings and sentence were set aside because the Magistrate failed to properly record and explain the accused's right to legal representation and did not explain the essential requirements of the charge, violating fair trial rights.

Source excerpt

  • Right to legal representation
  • Fair trial
  • Procedural defects
  • Counterfeit currency
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2014] LSHC 38

Makhotla v Magistrate Thaba-Tseka (CRI/APN 669 of 12)

Makhotla v Magistrate Thaba-Tseka (CRI/APN 669 of 12) [2014] LSHC 38 (20 January 2014)

Court
High Court
Case number
CRI/APN 669 of 12

The proceedings before the Magistrate were set aside because the Magistrate failed to comprehensively and verbatim explain to the unrepresented applicant his right to legal representation, the availability of legal aid, and the significance of cross-examination, resulting in a violation of fair trial rights under the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act.

Source excerpt

  • Fair trial rights
  • Right to legal representation
  • Procedural fairness
  • Legal aid
  • Cross-examination
  • Setting aside proceedings
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Lesotho decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.