scholarly journals REFORMING THE SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIAL SECURITY ADJUDICATION SYSTEM: INNOVATIVE EXPERIENCES FROM SOUTH AFRICAN NON-SOCIAL SECURITY JURISDICTIONS

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Mathias Ashu Tako Nyenti
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
South African ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
The South ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
Resolution System ◽  
Dispute Resolution System ◽  
Limited Scope

There is currently no uniform social security dispute resolution system in South Africa due to the piecemeal fashion in which schemes were established or protection against individual risks regulated. The result is that each statute provides for its own dispute resolution institution(s) and processes. There are also various gaps and challenges in the current social security dispute resolution systems, some of these relating to the uncoordinated and fragmented nature of the system; inaccessibility of some social security institutions; inappropriateness of some current appeal institutions; the lack of a systematic approach in establishing appeal institutions; a limited scope of jurisdiction and powers of adjudication institutions; inconsistencies in review and/or appeal provisions in various laws; an unavailability of alternative dispute resolution procedures; and an absence of institutional independence of adjudication institutions or forums. The system is therefore in need of reform. In developing an appropriate system, much can be learned from innovative experiences in comparative South African non-social security jurisdictions on the establishment of effective and efficient dispute resolution frameworks. Dispute resolution systems in the labour relations, business competition regulation and consumer protection jurisdictions have been established to realise the constitutional rights of their users (especially the rights of access to justice, to a fair trial and to just administrative action). They thus provide a benchmark for the development of the South African social security dispute resolution system.

scholarly journals TOWARDS AN EFFECTIVE KENYAN LABOUR DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM: A COMPARISON WITH THE SOUTH AFRICAN LABOUR DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM

Obiter ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Johana K Gathongo ◽  
Adriaan van der Walt
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
Resolution System ◽  
Labour Dispute ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Labour Standards ◽  
International Labour Standards ◽  
The Government ◽  
Dispute Resolution System

There have been notable concerns in the current dual dispute resolution system in Kenya. The problems include protracted referral timeframes for dismissal disputes, non-regulation of maximum timeframes for the agreed extension after 30 days conciliation period has lapsed, the absence of statutory timeframes for appointing a conciliator/ commissioner and arbitration process under both the Labour Relations Act, 2007 and the Employment Act, 2007. Likewise, the responsibility of resolving statutory labour disputes in Kenya is still heavily under the control of the government through the Ministry of Labour. There is still no independent statutory dispute resolution institution as envisaged by the Labour Relations Act, 2007. As a result, the Kenyan dispute resolution system has been criticised for lack of impartiality leading to the increase in strikes and lockouts.This article examines the effectiveness of the Kenyan labour dispute resolution system. The article evaluates the provisions of international labour standards relevant to labour dispute resolution. The article illuminates and describes the bottlenecks in the current Kenyan system and argues that it does not adequately respond to the needs of parties in terms of the international labour conventions. A comparative approach with South Africa is adopted to see how independent institutions, such as the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, Bargaining Councils and specialised Labour Courts can lead to effective dispute resolution. In view of that, a wide range of remedial intervention intended to address the gaps and flaws highlighted in the study are made. Systematically, the article provides suggestions and possible solutions for a better institutional framework and processes to address them.

scholarly journals DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM: THE NEED FOR MORE APPROPRIATE APPROACHES

Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
MAT Nyenti
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Social Security ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
South African ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
The Right ◽  
Resolution Processes ◽  
Social Security Beneficiaries

The right to social security in South Africa is adjudicated and enforced mainly by means of litigation. This article examines litigation as a mechanism for the resolution of social security disputes in South Africa and its impact on both the right to have access to court and to social security. It argues that court-based adjudication may not be the most appropriate means of adjudicating social security claims. This is particularly as South Africa is a country where social security beneficiaries have limited knowledge of the laws and procedures, coupled with a lack of publicly-provided legal assistance/representation for social security cases. Dispute resolution mainly through the courts may contribute to the limitation of their right to seek redress and by implication, their right to have access to social security. Finally, the article proposes the investigation of more appropriate dispute-resolution processes. This is due to the failure of court-based adjudication to ensure access to justice (and to social security); constitutional requirements arising from the protection of the rights of access to justice and to social security; the Constitution’s focus on protecting persons who are particularly vulnerable and desperate; the availability of other (more appropriate) dispute-resolution mechanisms; and the relatively successful implementation of these mechanisms in the resolution of social security disputes in comparative jurisdictions. 

scholarly journals Implementing a South African E-Dispute Resolution System For Consumer Disputes

Obiter ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-395
Author(s):  
Sershiv Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
South Africa ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
South African ◽  
Industrial Revolution ◽  
Online Dispute Resolution ◽  
Consumer Protection Act ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
Resolution System ◽  
Dispute Resolution System

In the 1990s, online dispute resolution became more prevalent with the growth of the Internet and its accompanying issues. Yet despite the apparent advantages of online dispute resolution platforms, South Africa has lagged behind in using such a system for consumer disputes. It has become necessary to appeal for the use of an online system since courts are often too costly and backlogged with other disputes; and existing consumer mechanisms found in the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 have proved to be ineffectual. With the expansion of artificial intelligence and South Africa now entering the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it is evident that reforms to consumer laws may be necessary to keep up with technological advances, as well as to expedite consumer disputes. The use of an online dispute resolution system powered by artificial intelligence may prove beneficial in South Africa. This article argues for the implementation of an e-dispute resolution system similar to eBay’s online Resolution Center.

scholarly journals The evolution of alternative dispute resolution and online dispute resolution in the European Un

CES Derecho ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-17
Author(s):  
Shamaise Peters
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Consumer Trust ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Online Dispute Resolution ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Resolution System ◽  
Dispute Resolution System ◽  
The Eu

The evolution of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) as an augmentation from Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) may lead to an authentic paradigm shift in the way disputes are handled beyond the traditional court systems. To assess state of the art and convey awareness, this paper explores the regulatory landscape of the European Union (EU) using the United Kingdom and Estonia to illustrate the key advancements and shortcomings of the supranational strategy. It discusses the relationships between ADR capabilities and its productive use in ODR, the ODR deployment and adoption, and the consequences that may arise if dispute resolution technologies leapfrog. The paper also speaks of automation and suggests the need to build integrative models into Artificial Intelligence (AI) - powered ODR platforms. It is apparent that the early challenges in the development of the ADR culture in the EU are still unresolved, affecting the proper integration of ADR principles and ODR technologies. A more effective coupling could be expected to smooth digital trade interactions by increasing access to justice and consumer trust in the redress capacities of the Dispute Resolution System (DRS) as a whole. 

scholarly journals Tax Appeal Proceedings before the Federal Tax Appeal Commission in Ethiopia: Critical Reflections

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-238
Author(s):  
Aschalew Ashagre Byness
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Tax Administration ◽  
Fair Play ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Federal Level ◽  
Fair Treatment ◽  
Resolution System ◽  
Dispute Resolution System ◽  
Critical Reflections

Under the 2016 Federal Tax Administration Proclamation (FTAP), it is by way of appeal that taxpayers reach the judiciary when they can show that the Federal Tax Appeal Commission (FTAC) has committed an error of law.  As far as factual issues are concerned, the decision of the FTAC is thus final and conclusive. Ethiopia’s tax dispute resolution system has made improvements although there has been discontent on the part of taxpayers. This article examines the tax appeal processes at the federal level to see whether the processes enhance fair play between taxpayers and the tax authority. Specifically, the article evaluates whether there are clear and adequate procedural rules that ensure access to justice for aggrieved taxpayers and fair treatment by the Federal Tax Appeal Commission (FTAC). I argue that although there have been certain improvements made by the FTAP (as far as administrative appeal before the FTAC is concerned), there are still some critical shortcomings that have to be reconsidered.

scholarly journals Pushing for Sustainability through Technology: administrative consensuality by default and online dispute resolutions tools

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-89
Author(s):  
Cássio Castro Souza ◽  
Justo Reyna
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Choice Architecture ◽  
The Public ◽  
Online Dispute Resolution ◽  
Resolution System ◽  
Dispute Resolution System

The Brazilian Public Administration is a repeat player and, often, predatory and strategic player. The behavior of the Public Administration is oriented towards the litigation and contributes to the increase in the congestion rate of the Judiciary, limiting access to justice. In this article, it was reflected whether a more adequate choice architecture could make the Public Administration start to show a more consensual and less litigious behavior. It was found that an architecture of choices appropriate to the greater promotion of access to Justice must create an administrative consensus by default, implemented based on an online dispute resolution system that presents an architecture of choices that makes the standard choice of individuals who wish to resolve a conflict with the Public Administration is self-composition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document