PER: Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
http://hdl.handle.net/10394/1150
2024-03-29T09:03:33ZCanefe, N. 2022. Critical Perspectives on Crimes against Humanity : The Limits of Universal Jurisdiction in the Global South (University of Wales Press 2020) [Book review]
http://hdl.handle.net/10394/41081
Canefe, N. 2022. Critical Perspectives on Crimes against Humanity : The Limits of Universal Jurisdiction in the Global South (University of Wales Press 2020) [Book review]
Agbor, Avitus A
In the current anti-accountability sentiment that has plagued most of Africa, triggered by the nasty politics of selectivity that is primarily motivated by considerations of realpolitik or the interests of specific states, Canefe's book lays bare the fundamental moral, legal and philosophical standpoint that advances the argument that perpetrators of mass atrocities must be held accountable. Unfortunately, the reality is different. She explores the vast (and almost impossible) impediments to attaining such an objective. Recognising the distinct and persuasive voices echoed by scholars from the Global South, the book examines the utilitarian effectiveness of using universal jurisdiction as a means towards this end. The critical views and responses of scholars who belong to TWAIL (an intellectual blog that is hotly and hardly contested by their counterparts from the Global North) expose, debunk and denounce the legitimacy of international law. The book argues that an international legal order that is largely mono-culturalistic, developed from selected principles, values and opinions from the West, cannot and should not be taken as a prototype of the global legal order. Instead, legal pluralism as a distinct feature of a diverse and multicultural world requires that a consensus is obtained: this is crucial if the world seeks to achieve what she calls a "neutralized universalization" of international law.
2022-01-01T00:00:00ZCopyright Reform in South Africa : Two Joint Academic Opinions on the Copyright Amendment Bill [B13B 2017]
http://hdl.handle.net/10394/41080
Copyright Reform in South Africa : Two Joint Academic Opinions on the Copyright Amendment Bill [B13B 2017]
Beiter, Klaus D.; Flynn, Sean; Forere, Malebakeng; Klaaren, Jonathan; Ncube, Caroline B.; Nwauche, Enyinna S.; Rens, Andrew; Samtani, Sanya; Schonwetter, Tobias
South Africa is in the process of reforming its copyright law, attempting to update and align it with constitutional rights and existing and prospective international treaty obligations. With the adoption of the Copyright Amendment Bill [B13B-2017] by both Houses of Parliament in March 2019, the apartheid-era Copyright Act of 1978 had almost successfully been amended, when the President of the Republic withheld his assent to the Bill referring it back to Parliament citing reservations about its constitutionality. Following calls for public comment by the parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on the President's reservations, a coalition of copyright and constitutional law experts, convinced of the constitutionality of the Bill, submitted two legal opinions to the Committee. The two opinions presented in this contribution underline the importance of copyright reform, as envisaged in the Bill, to bringing South African copyright law into the digital age and realising several constitutional rights including the rights to education, cultural participation, language, freedom of expression, and access to knowledge of everyone, without discrimination.
2022-01-01T00:00:00ZComparative Perspectives on the Keeping of Animals in Sectional (Strata) Title Schemes
http://hdl.handle.net/10394/41079
Comparative Perspectives on the Keeping of Animals in Sectional (Strata) Title Schemes
Van der Merwe, Cornelius G.
The aim of this article is to provide comparative perspectives on the keeping of animals in sectional title schemes by analysing the conduct rule for the keeping of animals, reptiles, and birds in the provisions of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act. This investigation is prompted by the approval of new pet rules by the chief ombud and the provisions of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act on adjudication orders available for nuisance caused by animals. The Act further allows the body corporate to record a new scheme governance rule or to declare a scheme rule invalid. The topics to be discussed are: the types of animal kept in sectional title schemes; the written approval of the trustees for the keeping of animals which may not be withheld unreasonably; whether the body corporate may adopt a scheme rule containing a blanket prohibition on the keeping of animals in a sectional title scheme; the reasonable conditions which may be attached to trustee approval; the withdrawal of approval if the conditions are breached; the requirements for a rule restricting the keeping of a kind of animals or animals with specific characteristics in a scheme; and the deemed approval for the keeping of guide, hearing, and assistance animals in a sectional title scheme.
2022-01-01T00:00:00ZThe Steinhoff Corporate Scandal and the Protection of Investors Who Purchased Shares on the Secondary Market
http://hdl.handle.net/10394/41078
The Steinhoff Corporate Scandal and the Protection of Investors Who Purchased Shares on the Secondary Market
Van der Linde, Kathleen E.
The December 2017 revelations of accounting irregularities in the Steinhoff group resulted in the share price dropping more than 95%. Investors, including pension funds, lost millions.
This contribution deals with some of the legal issues arising from the misstatement of the financial position of Steinhoff International Holdings NV and its South African predecessor Steinhoff International Holdings Ltd, which resulted in the inflation of its quoted share price. It considers how retail and institutional investors who had acquired their shares through trades on the regulated secondary market might recover the losses they suffered. The administrative penalty provisions in relation to market abuse are briefly considered but shown to be of very limited application as regards compensation to investors.
Common-law delictual liability and statutory civil liability in terms of section 218(2) and section 20(6) of the Companies Act are considered in the context of the first reported attempt at the certification of a shareholder class action. Unfortunately, both the potential statutory remedies were interpreted so restrictively by the court in the class action certification application that they would hardly serve any purpose. The interpretations are shown to cause anomalies in the context of the Companies Act and to be out of step with established principles of company law. Also, the certification court's application of the reflective loss and proper plaintiff principles is questioned.
Some of these issues might have been solved through further litigation, but for statutory compromise and composition mechanisms that brought a mutually acceptable early end to the uncertainty of protracted litigation.
2022-01-01T00:00:00Z