. . . dragged to court over M2 million arrears
Moorosi Tsiane
THE Ministry of Local Government, Chieftainship, Home Affairs and Police has been hauled before the High Court for allegedly failing to pay more than M2 million in rent arrears for the offices it occupies at the Maseru Mall.
Court papers filed in the Commercial Division of the High Court this week show that the government is being sued for several months’ rent arrears and associated charges totalling M2,060,978.64.
The government has been a tenant at Maseru Mall since 2015, when it entered into a lease agreement for Units 32 and 33, measuring about 362 square metres.
The Home Affairs Ministry has been using the premises as offices for the issuance of national identity documents and marriage certificates since 8 October 2015 when it signed the lease agreement, which it has been renewing annually.
The move was meant to ease the perennial congestion at the only office providing all the services then, which is at the Traffic Department Offices where Home Affairs now only provides passport services.
According to Maseru Mall’s lawyers, Mayet and Associates Attorneys, the lease required the government to pay a monthly rental of M47,573.74, plus M2,436.26 in operating costs.
The contract stipulates that an 8% interest accrues annually.
The government, as a tenant, was also responsible for the operating costs of the offices and Maseru Mall insists these obligations were clearly outlined and agreed upon when the lease was signed.
“In terms of the aforementioned lease agreement, the First Respondent inter alia agreed: To pay total monthly rental consisting of a basic monthly rental of M47,573.74 (excluding VAT), escalating at the rate of 8% per annum compounded yearly on every anniversary of the commencement date; operating costs of M2,436.26 (excluding VAT) plus actual increases; electricity and water consumption charges (as metered); sewer charges; refuse removal charges; aircon maintenance charges; as well as other associated charges.”
Maseru Mall argues that the lease also guarantees the landlord protection against non-payment.
“Should the tenant fail to make any payment in terms of this agreement by the due date, the landlord shall be entitled, but not obliged, to forthwith cancel the agreement, resume possession of the premises, and claim the full value of all arrears owing, together with the present value of each unpaid but not yet due total monthly rental for the unexpired portion of the agreement as pre-estimated liquidated damages.”
Maseru Mall contends that despite these provisions, the Ministry breached the lease by failing to pay rent from October 2024 to March 2025.
During this period, the monthly rent had escalated to M81,873.72. According to the landlord, the government continued occupying the offices without making any payments, causing arrears to accumulate to M2,060,978.64.
The landlord also claims that it made efforts to recover the debt before taking legal action. On 22 July 2025, Maseru Mall issued a final demand letter to the Ministry, instructing it to pay the arrears and vacate the premises. The Ministry responded on 28 July 2025, acknowledging the debt and the lease’s expiry, but requested an extension, which the landlord refused.
“The government responded on 28 July acknowledging its indebtedness in full, acknowledged the expiry of the lease agreement, and requested a further lease extension which was not agreed to. It should be noted that the First Respondent remains in significant arrears, which continue to accumulate due to ongoing occupation of the commercial premises.”
Maseru Mall stresses that despite acknowledging the debt, the government has not settled it.
“The arrears continue to rise while the Ministry remains in occupation of the space. Maseru Mall now seeks an order compelling the Ministry to pay the full arrear amount as well as damages for breach of the lease agreement.
“The First Respondent breached the terms of the lease by failing to make payments as agreed and is presently in arrears in the amount of M2,060,978.64. The Plaintiff has duly demanded payment, which remains outstanding, and the First Respondent has acknowledged its indebtedness.”
