Lelimo v Teaching Service Department and Others (C of A (CIV) 1 of 2012) [2012] LSCA 15 (27 April 2012)

IN THE COUR T OF AP P E AL OF LE S OTHO C OF A (CIV) No .0 1 / 2 0 1 2 In th e m a tter b etween : BOKANG LE LIMO AP P E LLANT AND TE ACHING S E R VICE DE P AR TME NT TE ACHING S E R VICE COMMIS S ION P R INCIP AL S E CR E TAR Y (MINIS TR Y OF E DUCATION) MINIS TE R OF EDUCATION ATTOR NE Y GE NE R AL 1 S TR E S P ONDE NT 2 ND R E S P ONDE NT 3 R D R E S P ONDE NT 4 TH R E S P ONDE NT 5 TH R E S P ONDE NT COR AM: S MALBE RGE R, J A S COTT, J A FARLAM, J A HE AR D: DE LIVE R E D: 2 0 APRIL 2 0 1 2 2 7 APRIL 2 0 1 2 S UMMA R Y Appe al aga in s t th e d ecis ion of th e High Cou rt u p h old in g a s pe cial ple a of pre s crip tion th e Govern m e n t Proceed in gs an d Con tracts Act 1 9 6 5 – applica b ility of th e Act – d ecis ion of th e Fu ll B en ch of th is Cou rt in MA K A MA NE v MINIS T R Y OF COMMUNICA T IONS S CIE NCE A ND T E CHNOLOGY d is pos itive of th e a ppe al- a ppe a l d is m is s e d w ith cos ts . te rm s of s ection 6 of in J UDGME NT S MALBE R GE R , J A [1 ] Th e a p p ella n t (a s p la in tiff), a for m er tea ch er em p loyed b y t h e fir s t r es p on d en t , in s titu ted a n a ction for d a m a ges a ga in s t t h e r es p on d en ts (a s d efen d a n ts ) in t h e High Cou r t in Ap r il 2 0 0 7 . His cla im wa s b a s ed on t h e fir s t r es p on d en t ’s a lleged ly h a vin g wr on gfu lly a llowed cer ta in in s u r a n ce p olicies ta k en ou t b y t h e a p p ella n t t o la p s e in or a b ou t 2 0 0 2 . In t h e d ecla r a tion , wh ich wa s s ign ed b y t h e a p p ella n t , h e s p ecifica lly a lleged t h a t h is cla im wa s in s titu ted “in a ccord a n ce w ith Govern m en t Con tra ct Act No 4 of 1 9 6 5 .” Th e a p p ella n t a ls o join ed Metr op olita n Life a n d Les ot h o Na tion a l In s u r a n ce Gr ou p a s t h e s ixt h a n d s even t h d efen d a n ts r es p ectively. He s u b s equ en tly for m a lly wit h d r ew h is a ction a ga in s t Les ot h o Na tion a l In s u r a n ce Gr ou p , a n d a p p ea r s n ever t o h a ve s ou gh t a n y r elief a ga in s t Metr op olita n Life. [2 ] Th e r es p on d en ts d u ly filed a s p ecia l p lea of p r es cr ip tion a llegin g t h a t t h e a p p ella n t’s a ction h a d p r es cr ib ed in t er m s of t h e Gover n m en t Pr oceed in gs a n d Con tr a cts Act 4 of 1 9 6 5 (t h e Act) “in th a t th e ca u s e of a ction a ros e a s fa r b a ck a s th e y e a r 2 0 0 4 , pla in tiff’s s u m m on s w a s filed a n d s erve d in 2 0 0 7 , m ore th a n tw o y e a rs s in ce th e ca u s e of action firs t a ros e.” [3 ] Section 6 of t h e Act p r ovid es :- “6 . S u bje ct to th e prov is ion s of s ection s s ix , s e v e n , e ig h t , n in e , t e n , e le v e n , t w e lve an d t h ir t e e n of th e Pre s crip tion Act no action or other proceedings shall be capable of being brought against Her Majesty in Her Government of Basutoland by virtue of the provisions of section two of this Act after the expiration of the period of two years from the time when the cause of action or other proceedings first accrued.” It is com m on ca u s e t h a t t h e a p p ella n t’s ca u s e of a ction a r os e m or e t h a n two yea r s b efor e t h e in s t itu tion of h is a ction . It is a ls o com m on ca u s e t h a t t h e p r ovis ion s of s ection 6 , if va lid , wou ld a p p ly t o a n a ction a ga in s t t h e r es p on d en t s . [4 ] Th e m a tt er ca m e b efor e Ma h a s e J . Th e lea r n ed J u d ge u p h eld t h e s p ecia l p lea a n d d is m is s ed t h e a p p ella n t’s cla im wit h cos t s . Th e p r es en t a p p ea l is d ir ected a ga in s t h er or d er in t h a t r ega r d . [5 ] Des p ite h is r efer en ce to, a n d a p p a r en t r elia n ce u p on , t h e Act in h is d ecla r a tion , t h e a p p ella n t s ou gh t t o ch a llen ge t h e va lid ity of t h e Act on a p p ea l. Th e n u b of h is a r gu m en t b efor e u s , a s I u n d er s tood it , wa s t h a t t h e Act wa s on ly in ten d ed to b e of effect for a s lon g a s t h e Over s ea s Ser vice Pr ocla m a tion No 1 of 1 9 6 5 (t h e Pr ocla m a tion ) a n d its a s s ocia ted Agr eem en t (t h e Agr eem en t) wer e in op er a tion . In ter m s of s ection s 1 a n d 3 of t h e Pr ocla m a tion , t h e Pr ocla m a tion a n d t h e Agr eem en t wer e d eem ed t o com e in t o op er a tion on 1 Ap r il 1 9 6 1 , a n d wer e effectively t o h a ve ter m in a ted (in ter m s of cla u s e 8 of t h e a gr eem en t) on 3 1 Ma r ch 1 9 7 1 . Th e a p p ella n t s ou gh t t o lin k t h e Act wit h t h e Pr ocla m a tion a n d Agr eem en t a n d s u b m it ted t h a t t h e op er a tion of t h e Act wa s in t en d ed to b e con fin ed to t h a t lim ited p er iod . [6 ] Th er e is n o exp r es s or im p lied p r ovis ion in t h e Pr ocla m a tion or t h e Agr eem en t, n or in t h e Act, wh ich lin k s t h em a n d m a k es t h e d u r a tion of t h e Act co-exten s ive wit h t h a t of t h e Pr ocla m a tion a n d Agr eem en t . Nor is t h er e a n y p r ovis ion in t h e Act wh ich lim its , or s eek s t o lim it , t h e p er iod for wh ich it is t o b e op er a tive. Mor eover , it is com m on ca u s e th a t t h e Act h a s n ever b een r ep ea led . In t h e cir cu m s ta n ces t h er e is in m y view n o b a s is or ju s tifica tion for lim itin g t h e a p p lica tion of t h e Act t o t h e p er iod 1 Ap r il 1 9 6 1 t o 3 1 Ma r ch 1 9 7 1 . [7 ] Fu r t h er m or e, a n d m or e im p or ta n tly, t h e r ecen t d ecis ion of t h e Fu ll Ben ch of t h is Cou r t in MOHAU MAKAMANE v MINIS TR Y OF COMMUNICATIONS S CIE NCE AND TE CHNOLOGY AND OTHE R S, C OF A (CIV) No . 2 7 / 2 0 1 1 , d eliver ed on 2 1 Octob er 2 0 1 1 , wh ich is b in d in g u p on u s , is d is p os itive of t h e p r es en t a p p ea l. Th e Cou r t in t h a t ca s e wa s a s k ed to con s id er wh et h er s ection 6 of t h e Act s h ou ld b e s tr u ck d own a s u n con s titu tion a l on t h e b a s is t h a t it in fr in ged t h e p r ovis ion s of s ection 1 9 of t h e Con s tit u tion . After r eviewin g t h e r eleva n t p r ovis ion s , s u b m is s ion s a n d con s id er a tion s t h e Cou r t (p er Ra m od ib ed i P) con clu d ed (in p a r a gr a p h 2 2 ) t h a t it wa s n ot u n con s tit u tion a l. It wen t on to a d d (in p a r a gr a p h 2 4 ) t h a t “it is cle a r th a t s ection 6 of th e [Act] is a p res crip tion prov is ion n ot ca p a b le of be in g ex te n d ed b y th e exe rcis e of th e cou rt’s com m on la w p ow e r to ex te n d tim e lim its … … ”. It follows t h a t s ection 6 of t h e Act is va lid a n d a p p lica b le, a n d t h a t t h e a p p ella n t ’s d a m a ges cla im ca n n ot s u cceed b eca u s e of h is fa ilu r e t o in s titu te a ction wit h in t h e p r es cr ib ed p er iod . His a p p ea l m u s t a ccor d in gly b e d is m is s ed . In evita b ly cos ts m u s t follow t h e r es u lt . [8 ] Th e ou tcom e is u n for t u n a te for t h e a p p ella n t . Regr et ta b ly t h er e is n ot h in g th is Cou r t ca n d o to a s s is t h im . Th e a p p ella n t m u s t b e com m en d ed for h is in d u s tr y in t h e p r ep a r a tion of h is h ea d s of a r gu m en t a n d t h e com m it m en t wit h wh ich h e h a s p u r s u ed h is ca u s e. [9 ] Th e followin g or d er is m a d e: Th e a p p ea l is d is m is s ed , wit h cos ts . ____________________________ J . W. S MALBE R GE R J US TICE OF AP PE AL I con cu r : _________________________ D. G. S COTT J US TICE OF AP PE AL I con cu r : _________________________ I. G. F AR LAM J US TICE OF AP PE AL F o r Ap p e lla n t : In Per s on F o r R e s p o n d e n t s : Ad v. L. Mok h eh le