The Africanisation Of South African Civil Procedure: The Way Forward

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fawzia Cassim ◽  
Nomulelo Queen Mabeka

Civil procedure enforces the rules and provisions of civil law.  The law of civil procedure involves the issuing, service and filing of documents to initiate court proceedings in the superior courts and lower courts. Indeed, notice of legal proceedings is given to every person to ensure compliance with the audi alteram partem maxim (“hear the other side”). There are various rules and legislation that regulate these court proceedings such as inter alia, the Superior Courts Act, 2013, Uniform Rules of Court, Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Act, 2012 and the Magistrates’ Courts Act of 1944. The rules of court are binding on a court by virtue of their nature.  The purpose of these rules is to facilitate inexpensive and efficient legislation. However, civil procedure does not only depend on statutory provisions and the rules of court.  Common law also plays a role. Superior Courts are said to exercise inherent jurisdiction in that its jurisdiction is derived from common law.  It is noteworthy that whilst our rules of court and statutes are largely based on the English law, Roman-Dutch law also has an impact on our procedural law. The question thus arises, how can our law of civil procedure transform to accommodate elements of Africanisation as we are part and parcel of the African continent/diaspora? In this regard, the article examines the origins of Western-based civil procedure, our formal court systems, the impact of the Constitution on traditional civil procedure, the use of dispute resolution mechanisms in Western legal systems and African culture, an overview of the Traditional Courts Bill of 2012 and the advent of the Traditional Courts Bill of 2017. The article also examines how the contentious Traditional Courts Bills of 2012 and 2017 will transform or complement the law of civil procedure and apply in practice once it is passed into law.

Author(s):  
John Jackson ◽  
Paul Roberts

This chapter offers a critique of the “common law model” of the Law of Evidence and calls for a new organizing principle that “reimagines” evidence law as forensic science, particularly in the context of criminal adjudication. It first provides an overview of the orthodox common law model of Evidence Law before deconstructing it, arguing that it adopts a very narrow doctrinal focus, thus undermining the dynamic processes through which evidence is collected, organized, presented, tested, and evaluated in legal proceedings. It also suggests that the model is difficult to defend in terms of robust disciplinary boundaries differentiating that which is specifically evidentiary from broader aspects of substantive and procedural law. Finally, it considers the so-called “New Evidence Scholarship” on evidence law, the impact of the new cosmopolitanism on common law evidence, and the rationale for reconceptualizing evidence law as part of an interdisciplinary “forensic science” that goes “beyond common law.”


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 222-232
Author(s):  
D.Kh. VALEEV ◽  
N.N. MAKOLKIN

This article is an attempt to briefly analyze the scientific activity of Mikhail Konstantinovich Treushnikov, which is carried out through the prism of his publication activity in all its manifestations. In addition, this study presents an attempt to collect a complete bibliography of M.K. Treushnikov. The significance of this study is determined both by its uniqueness, which is due to the use of information from various sources, and the presence of individual theses and conclusions formulated by the authors. Thus, this work focuses on the fact that M.K. Treushnikov, in addition to considering the problems of civil and arbitral procedural law, paid attention to the development of problems of higher education, including in terms of methodology, and that, perhaps, allowed him to create a real school of civil procedure law in the walls of the Lomonosov Moscow State University. In addition, the thesis is put forward and substantiated that M.K. Treushnikov was actively engaged in questions of the law of evidence, as well as judicial law, which were widely reflected in his numerous works published in various journals and collections, as well as embodied in monographs.


2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul S. Davies

Both interpretation and rectification continue to pose problems. Difficulties are compounded by blurring the boundary between the two. In Simic v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation [2016] HCA 47, the High Court of Australia overturned the decisions of the lower courts which had held that performance bonds could be interpreted in a “loose” manner in order to correct a mistake. However, the documents could be rectified in order to reflect the actual intentions of the parties. This decision should be welcomed: the mistake was more appropriately corrected through the equitable jurisdiction than at common law. Significantly, the concurring judgments of French C.J. and Kiefel J. highlight that the law of rectification now seems to be different in Australia from the law in England. It is to be hoped that the English approach will soon be revisited (see further P. Davies, “Rectification versus Interpretation” [2016] C.L.J. 62).


Author(s):  
A. D. Zolotukhin ◽  
◽  
L. A. Volchihina ◽  

On the basis of research, the structure of civil procedural law is defined as a system rather than an elementary set of legal norms and institutions. Determining the significance of the system of civil procedural law, it was concluded that having individuality, such a structure is one of the features that distinguish civil procedural law from other branches of law. The authors also come to the conclusion that the established properties of the system of civil procedural law, such as unity, interconnection (interaction) and independence of application, determine the possibility of applying individual elements of the structure of the system of civil procedural law, when considering substantive situations as an independent both individually and collectively. This ensures the possibility of obtaining the required positive result and characterizes it as universal. Critically examining various concepts, the authors offer their own definition of the concept of the system of civil procedural law. The conclusion is also made about the relationship of the system of civil procedural law with the principles of civil procedural law and the procedural form of civil legal proceedings.


Author(s):  
Stuart Sime

This chapter considers the modern scope and limitations on the use of the court’s inherent jurisdiction in common law jurisdictions. It considers the underlying juridical basis for the jurisdiction, and the underlying theories, namely that residuary powers were vested in the High Court in England and Wales by the Judicature Acts, and that all courts have inherent powers to prevent abuse of process. It considers the ramifications of the distinction between inherent jurisdiction and inherent powers. Changes in the legal landscape since the seminal articles by Master Jacob and Professor Dockray, including the codification of civil procedure in many common law jurisdictions, and modern understanding of the rule of law and the separation of powers, are considered. It is argued that while existing applications of the inherent jurisdiction should be retained, it is no longer acceptable for the English High Court, and equivalent courts in other jurisdictions, to generate new procedural law by resorting to the inherent jurisdiction.


2021 ◽  
pp. 414-470
Author(s):  
André Naidoo

This chapter explains the law relating to the requirements and remedies for misrepresentation. The rules that the chapter covers developed originally in the context of all types of contracts. However, more recent legislation has introduced some specific protection for consumers. Consequently, the common law rules and older legislation that the chapter covers are now more applicable to non-consumer contracts, i.e. contracts between businesses and those between private parties. The chapter starts by addressing the kind of false statements that can result in a remedy. It then addresses the common law and legislative remedies that could be available to the innocent party. Finally, the chapter turns to the impact of the more recent consumer legislation before finally examining the extent to which an exemption clause could cover liability for misrepresentation.


Author(s):  
Ian Smith ◽  
Aaron Baker ◽  
Owen Warnock

This chapter considers the law relating to strikes and other industrial action including the important changes made by the Trade Union Act 2016. It deals with the historical development of common law and statute in this field to illuminate the current law. The relevance of the European Convention on Human Rights is considered. The tortious and criminal liabilities flowing from industrial action are considered and the crucial immunity for tortious liability provided by the ‘golden formula’ including the exceptions to this immunity and the preconditions of complying with rules on balloting and notice of industrial action. Picketing is considered in relation to the many legal liabilities and the statutory immunity for some peaceful picketing. The granting of injunctions to stop industrial action is examined. The impact of industrial action on individual employees is considered in relation to their contractual rights and liabilities and the law of unfair dismissal.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-225
Author(s):  
Jaakko Husa

Fairness is an important part of legal proceedings and fair trial. Procedural rules are an integral part of the legal cultural context that gives them meaning. This article discusses procedural cultures from the point view of legal language and legal culture. The multiplicity of law and legal cultures functions as a base for an analysis of criminal procedural law using plea bargaining as an example. The author highlights the differences between common law and civil law and shows that even though there has been convergence there are still significant legal cultural differences. This article reveals how there is a legal cultural variety in the ways in which fairness forms a part of the conception of fair trial as a European human right. The concluding section highlights the theoretical implications of the article as a whole by stressing the importance of sensitivity and the constant need to define the specific meaning.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annalena Hanke

This highly significant work in terms of litigation practice critically examines the case law of Germany’s highest courts with regard to third-party counterclaims. In particular, it discusses the recognition of third-party counterclaims as an independent institution of procedural law. This work solves the problems that arise in this respect, above all the question of local jurisdiction, using the existing legally regulated instruments of procedural law. Due to the actual lack of the presupposed loophole in the regulations, it therefore calls into question both the analogous application of § 33 of Germany’s civil procedure code (Zivilprozessordnung) and the judicial development of the law in this area.


1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assaf Likhovski

My story is full of holes. The first hole, or rather, ditch, was dug in 1930 by the municipality of Haifa. An Arab, Dr. Caesar Khoury, fell into the ditch and fractured his shoulder-blade.Could Dr. Khoury recover? The law of torts of mandatory Palestine was found in the Mejelle — an Ottoman code of Moslem civil law. Did the Mejelle provide a remedy in the case of personal injury? “Unfortunately,” said Judge Francis Baker, who delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court of Palestine, “the Mejelle dealt with liability for damages caused by animals to property, but it was ‘silent’ with regards to injuries caused to persons”. Therefore, Dr. Khoury could not recover.The second hole in my story belongs to a Jew, Feivel Danovitz. In 1939, Danovitz was run down by a truck in Tel Aviv. He sued the driver and the owner of the truck. The lower courts of Tel Aviv decided that if the Mejelle did not deal with liability for personal injury, that meant that there was a hole in the tort law of Palestine. Such a hole could be filled by recourse to the English common law in accordance with the provisions of Article 46 of the Palestine Order-in-Council, 1922. Since the English common law recognized liability for personal injury, Danovitz could recover.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document