tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-81435792024-03-28T14:51:47.247+02:00Bregman Moodley Attorneys BlogTaking the sting out of legal problems since 1974Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.comBlogger495125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-41873277918305356492024-03-28T14:50:00.004+02:002024-03-28T14:50:47.068+02:00Are signatures required on agreements of sale?<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnsStXZ-c7V_2bzMZK6uk5t-HbuSR_nRP9UNIoHKiy6NLyBe3JD6TTepeezvoYgQkpP8wv4mfu4ElpdA8SYBjSvwZrE2fMHf0VY42BFRDca4l2nUXrgdjboozWIsNp4qe-qMLxgOPGevQD4w60x_viziRhYYr6G5g4YDsJKvjg-HMpJ0kLAlqQ/s270/witnesses.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnsStXZ-c7V_2bzMZK6uk5t-HbuSR_nRP9UNIoHKiy6NLyBe3JD6TTepeezvoYgQkpP8wv4mfu4ElpdA8SYBjSvwZrE2fMHf0VY42BFRDca4l2nUXrgdjboozWIsNp4qe-qMLxgOPGevQD4w60x_viziRhYYr6G5g4YDsJKvjg-HMpJ0kLAlqQ/s1600/witnesses.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the realm of legal agreements, the necessity of witness
signatures on contracts or agreements of sale is a common question. Often,
there's ambiguity surrounding whether such witnesses are legally mandated.
Particularly in the context of electronic signatures, the issue gains
prominence as physical presence becomes irrelevant.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Summary of the Law:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Legally, there isn't a strict requirement for witnesses to
sign agreements of sale. However, witness signatures hold
significant evidentiary value. They provide assurance and authentication,
especially in scenarios where a party disputes their signature. A witness can
confirm the authenticity of a signature, thereby bolstering the agreement's
integrity.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">For witnesses to be effective, certain conditions must be
met. The contracting party must sign in the presence of the witness, and the
witness's identification and contact details must be ascertainable. Financial
institutions, often pivotal in such transactions, may insist on witness
signatures to validate agreements before considering financial applications.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">While not mandated by law, it's advisable that agreements of sale be signed before identifiable witnesses. This practice
enhances accountability and reduces the likelihood of disputes. In instances of
electronic signatures, where physical presence is absent, alternative methods
of witness confirmation should be explored. Moreover, any alterations or
amendments to the agreement should be acknowledged by all parties and
witnesses, pre-empting future conflicts.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In essence, while witness signatures aren't legally
obligatory, their inclusion fortifies the credibility of agreements. Therefore,
it's recommended that parties incorporate witness signatures, ensuring
transparency and reliability in contractual dealings.</span><o:p></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-40333045449575115392024-03-22T14:44:00.006+02:002024-03-22T14:44:54.151+02:00Ensuring Gas Safety: SAQCC Gas Certification for Property Transfers<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2SyX1aKIsQlzZCyCgmdgF8DhigWfKykZspKDM50JQOtHO3nxbO-r639_dvSxEIlQHTSgGPeX8WQOuAx7qsqkQ_el3erJg4UFOCqTHyMVb5PWvuKqmOlAKE5FsTlMlcU1MsAWku0zyH2-eAZ6AeN50e1eYgUl36E6F4ERPoHP6v_XTnCeGezn5/s800/Gas.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="703" data-original-width="800" height="281" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2SyX1aKIsQlzZCyCgmdgF8DhigWfKykZspKDM50JQOtHO3nxbO-r639_dvSxEIlQHTSgGPeX8WQOuAx7qsqkQ_el3erJg4UFOCqTHyMVb5PWvuKqmOlAKE5FsTlMlcU1MsAWku0zyH2-eAZ6AeN50e1eYgUl36E6F4ERPoHP6v_XTnCeGezn5/s320/Gas.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p><b style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:</b><span style="font-family: verdana;"> When it comes to properties equipped
with gas installations, ensuring safety is paramount. Gas compliance
certificates are crucial for property transfers to confirm that gas
installations meet safety standards. However, the issuance of these certificates
should only be entrusted to qualified professionals. To address this concern,
the South African Qualification and Certification Committee (SAQCC) Gas was
established as a Non-Profit Company. This entity collaborates with four Member
Associations to maintain a centralized database of registered and authorized
Gas Practitioners.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Why SAQCC Gas Exists:</b> <a href="https://saqccgas.co.za/">SAQCC Gas</a> exists to guarantee the competence
and reliability of technicians responsible for gas installations. Gas systems,
including natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, air conditioning and
refrigeration gas, as well as compressed industrial and medical gases, pose
significant safety risks if not handled correctly. Therefore, the SAQCC Gas, in
collaboration with Member Associations such as the Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Association of South Africa (LPGSA), Southern Africa Compressed Gases
Association (SACGA), South African Refrigeration & Air Conditioning
Contractors Association (SARACCA), and Southern African Gas Association (SAGA),
works diligently to register and authorize gas practitioners.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>What SAQCC Gas Does:</b> SAQCC Gas, with the endorsement
of the Department of Employment and Labour, oversees the registration process
for gas practitioners. The company ensures that only qualified individuals are
entrusted with gas-related tasks through its centralized database. This not
only safeguards the integrity of gas installations but also enhances overall
safety standards in the industry.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Summation:</b> In essence, SAQCC Gas plays a vital role
in upholding gas safety standards in South Africa. It collaborates with Member
Associations, regulating the registration of gas practitioners, and ensuring that
only competent professionals handle gas installations. This not only mitigates
the risk of accidents but also fosters confidence in gas-related transactions,
particularly during property transfers. Through its efforts, SAQCC Gas
contributes significantly to safeguarding lives and properties across the
nation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-25666706869398164702024-03-15T15:09:00.001+02:002024-03-15T15:09:24.816+02:00Misrepresentation in Contracts<p><span style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUm33VCpq3-jShgfqlORTeGeUYCANJ9IlCHixDNEVrf4oZR2BNM3Omc7HhuTxl3wSFloo2PdXOtxjRS-BUnV_FYdgptfolAP3SRe178IoMJhpFd8ePnR_7i_hbvkcUSRnnjGmmeKO5DJZ8tMK5vqEdQW0HZ_6SmHAHEp_veGJi6oofs6NxuD2p/s512/Contract%20signing%20-%20auburn%20lady.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="512" data-original-width="512" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUm33VCpq3-jShgfqlORTeGeUYCANJ9IlCHixDNEVrf4oZR2BNM3Omc7HhuTxl3wSFloo2PdXOtxjRS-BUnV_FYdgptfolAP3SRe178IoMJhpFd8ePnR_7i_hbvkcUSRnnjGmmeKO5DJZ8tMK5vqEdQW0HZ_6SmHAHEp_veGJi6oofs6NxuD2p/s320/Contract%20signing%20-%20auburn%20lady.png" width="320" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana;"><br />Understanding Your Rights, Remedies, and Implications for Contractual
Relationships in South African Law</span><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the realm of contracts,
misrepresentation can lead to significant complications and disputes. It occurs
when one party makes a false statement that influences the other party's
decision to enter into a contract. This could be done knowingly, recklessly, or
innocently. Understanding misrepresentation and its consequences is essential
for both parties involved in a contract.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Summary of the Law:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Misrepresentation in contracts
refers to a false statement of fact made by one party to induce the other party
to enter into a contract. It can occur during negotiations or within the
contract itself. There are three main types of misrepresentation: innocent,
negligent, and fraudulent. Regardless of the type, misrepresentation can lead
to legal remedies for the innocent party.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Remedies for
Misrepresentation:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">When misrepresentation is proven,
the innocent party has several remedies available:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol start="1" style="margin-top: 0cm;" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i>Rescission</i>: This involves undoing the
contract and returning both parties to their pre-contractual positions.
It's pursued when the misrepresented fact was material in influencing the
contract's formation.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i>Damages</i>: The innocent party can seek
monetary compensation for any financial losses suffered due to the
misrepresentation. Damages aim to put the innocent party in the position
they would have been in had the misrepresentation not occurred.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i>Specific Performance</i>: In cases where damages
are inadequate, the court may order specific performance, compelling the
party responsible for the misrepresentation to fulfil their contractual
obligations as originally agreed upon.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">It's important to note that the
innocent party can elect the preferred remedy but choosing one may waive the
right to pursue others.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Conclusion:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Misrepresentation in contracts
can lead to disputes and legal action, impacting contractual relationships.
Understanding misrepresentation and seeking legal advice before entering into
agreements can help mitigate risks and protect your interests. By being aware
of misrepresentation issues, parties can navigate contracts more effectively
and safeguard their rights.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-79010478364628791002024-03-08T10:58:00.006+02:002024-03-08T10:58:51.404+02:00The Minister of Employment and Labour has increased the earnings threshold and the national minimum wage.<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj43vRJ8EbInheQbZS95dL8ZQJmfwqKY8YkAK_xuIbCqAiKcbs4llfxI2zXv1VaUdoZvvOURZL8oijdSJgUtbCcEs7E1-JItr6knjCZFCsJ-_zLjZ8hkX04roftq38faE_GL4hH0SuD54C-bOBLBnEBQEbfcYo-iufK16EglrW_-UhyphenhyphenCIgWbxHM/s270/domestic%20worker%20paid.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj43vRJ8EbInheQbZS95dL8ZQJmfwqKY8YkAK_xuIbCqAiKcbs4llfxI2zXv1VaUdoZvvOURZL8oijdSJgUtbCcEs7E1-JItr6knjCZFCsJ-_zLjZ8hkX04roftq38faE_GL4hH0SuD54C-bOBLBnEBQEbfcYo-iufK16EglrW_-UhyphenhyphenCIgWbxHM/s1600/domestic%20worker%20paid.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><b style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><p><b style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><br /></b></p>Earnings Threshold Adjustment:</b><span style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;">
Effective April 1, 2024, the Minister of Employment and Labour has revised the
earnings threshold from R241,110.59 per annum (R20,092.54 per month) to
R254,371.67 per annum (R21,197.63 per month). The earnings threshold, as
defined, constitutes the regular annual remuneration of an employee before the
deduction of income tax, pension, medical aid, and analogous contributions,
excluding corresponding payments by the employer. Notably, subsistence and
transport allowances, achievement awards, and overtime remuneration do not
factor into this calculation.</span><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Employees surpassing the earnings
threshold are exempted from certain provisions regulating work hours, overtime
compensation, compressed schedules, averaging of hours, meal breaks, rest
intervals, Sunday remuneration, night shifts, and public holiday compensation
under the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, 1997 (BCEA). Conversely,
individuals earning between R20,093 and R21,198 per month will now qualify as
"vulnerable" workers, thereby enjoying enhanced entitlements
according to the BCEA.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Implications for Temporary and
Fixed-Term Employees:</b> Temporary employment services (TES) employees earning
within the aforementioned bracket shall, from April 1, 2024, be deemed to be
employees of the TES client, provided they satisfy the criteria delineated in
Section 198A of the Labour Relations Act (LRA). Should such employees engage in
non-temporary duties for a duration exceeding three months with the client,
they may attain the status of permanent employees of the latter, consequently
rendering the client jointly and severally liable for any BCEA non-compliance
by the TES.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Similarly, fixed-term contract
employees earning within the stipulated range will, as of April 1, 2024, be
deemed permanent employees of their respective employers if they meet the
requisites articulated in section 198B of the LRA. An employer's failure to
justify the term's duration may prompt the designation of these employees as
permanent, necessitating equal treatment in comparison to permanent
counterparts.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>National Minimum Wage
Augmentation:</b> Commencing March 1, 2024, the Minister has raised the
national minimum wage by 8.5%, elevating it from R25.42 to R27.58 per ordinary
hour worked. This increase pertains to most workers, encompassing farm and
domestic labourers, whose minimum wage has aligned with the national rate since
2022.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">However, exemptions apply to
individuals engaged in expanded public works programs or enrolled in
learnerships, with distinct wage revisions applicable to each category.
Expanded works program participants will witness their minimum wage escalate
from R13.97 to R15.16 per hour, while learnership participants, as per Section
17 of the Skills Development Act, 1998, will receive increased allowances
commensurate with their National Qualifications Framework (NQF) level and
earned credits.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Exceptions and Compliance
Imperatives:</b> Certain personnel, including members of the South African
Defence Force, the National Intelligent Agency, the South African Secret
Service, and volunteers, are exempted from the ambit of the National Minimum
Wage Act, 2018. Employers are strongly urged to ensure adherence to the revised
minimum wages, as non-compliance may trigger penalties under Section 76A(1) of
the BCEA.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">To maintain compliance, employers
must undertake comprehensive reviews of employment contracts and policies to
align them with the revised legislated amounts. Furthermore, audits of both the
workforce and labour suppliers are imperative to ensure BCEA compliance across
the board.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">These regulatory adjustments
signify enhanced remuneration and safeguards for a substantial portion of the
South African workforce, underscoring the evolving landscape of labour law in
the nation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-54967153368536526562024-03-06T11:16:00.000+02:002024-03-06T11:16:00.857+02:00Navigating Arbitration: Understanding the global landscape of arbitration<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc7pwASJPZoHqasm1ZhjZmWkBtLCDW9ZKcTz6maGKCvvA4pJyj4cWbjSjVSko584S3z7xHVXQUmqsh8DAL5pdJLbKlPUTrUmDEklNdslL3lqR2ycnaa6UGSjbUE_dBgHYPLwBtvDQIj-ZOBQWrhrT0S1LASJRjX4NShNwt1rlHTavxXsRb_yuq/s270/Wrestling.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc7pwASJPZoHqasm1ZhjZmWkBtLCDW9ZKcTz6maGKCvvA4pJyj4cWbjSjVSko584S3z7xHVXQUmqsh8DAL5pdJLbKlPUTrUmDEklNdslL3lqR2ycnaa6UGSjbUE_dBgHYPLwBtvDQIj-ZOBQWrhrT0S1LASJRjX4NShNwt1rlHTavxXsRb_yuq/s1600/Wrestling.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p><b style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Introduction:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-family: verdana; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%; text-align: justify;"> Better than arm wrestling, arbitration is becoming increasingly popular
as an alternative to resolving disputes in national courts. Its appeal lies in
various factors including finality, confidentiality, speed, enforceability,
neutrality, and adaptability to specific case circumstances. This article
explores the global landscape of arbitration, its benefits, and the
considerations parties must bear in mind when choosing this method of dispute
resolution.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">1.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Globalization and Arbitration's
Rise:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">The surge in cross-border trade
and investment has propelled arbitration as the preferred mechanism for
resolving international disputes.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">International perspective of
arbitrators and practitioners fosters a less narrow-minded approach compared to
national courts.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">2.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Navigating Varied Legal
Landscapes:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Differences in procedural laws
across jurisdictions can impact arbitration agreements, requiring parties to be
mindful of default and mandatory rules.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">3.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Court Intervention in Arbitral
Proceedings:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Parties typically prefer to keep
disputes out of national courts but may require court intervention for asset or
evidence preservation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">The extent of court intervention
varies, influencing the attractiveness of jurisdictions for arbitration.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">4.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">The Crucial Arbitration
Agreement:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Arbitration agreement serves as
the foundation of the tribunal's jurisdiction and parties' obligation to
arbitrate.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Variances in national laws
regarding the validity, scope, and interpretation of the agreement can
significantly affect dispute outcomes.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">5.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Jurisdiction Disputes:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Tribunals generally decide their
own competence, but differences exist in courts' power to reconsider tribunal
decisions on jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">6.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Challenging Awards and
Enforcement:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Arbitration awards are typically
challenging to contest, ensuring finality in disputes.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Varying court approaches to
enforcing awards and grounds for challenging them impact arbitration's
effectiveness.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18.0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 18.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">7.<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Role of Party-Appointed
Arbitrators:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Party-appointed arbitrators
contribute to confidence in the decision-making process.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 54.0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; tab-stops: list 54.0pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Variances in their duties across
jurisdictions affect impartiality and presentation of parties' perspectives.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Conclusion:</span></b><span style="color: #515151; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"> Arbitration offers numerous advantages over litigation, making it an
attractive option for resolving disputes, especially in an increasingly
globalized world. However, parties must navigate diverse legal landscapes and
consider factors such as court intervention, arbitration agreements,
jurisdiction disputes, award challenges, enforcement, and the role of
party-appointed arbitrators. Understanding these complexities ensures effective
utilization of arbitration and maximizes its benefits for all parties involved.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-49486448869734712162024-02-29T11:20:00.002+02:002024-02-29T11:20:17.600+02:00Seokwane v Bidvest Prestige Cleaning Services: Unfair Dismissal of Elderly<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPwY3SsDiSZ7J_gBueJtDluXtymA3-xkZqgOxHLq1oOwzOB2cWlfg8QdkcGXl6U-wrMvhXo5f1UkVSMnVQ2Agrc3DXHV-FrQthzG2Y1doXeu0t19NpzoUjVTbwJjGwxSuCgAzC5gaMeAEUIg41ACxKJ1Rxrh7rc6LzirQf80-qwsurUzwr9uqU/s270/dismissal%20black%20lady.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPwY3SsDiSZ7J_gBueJtDluXtymA3-xkZqgOxHLq1oOwzOB2cWlfg8QdkcGXl6U-wrMvhXo5f1UkVSMnVQ2Agrc3DXHV-FrQthzG2Y1doXeu0t19NpzoUjVTbwJjGwxSuCgAzC5gaMeAEUIg41ACxKJ1Rxrh7rc6LzirQf80-qwsurUzwr9uqU/s1600/dismissal%20black%20lady.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /> <p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Introduction:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In
South Africa, laws prohibit unfair discrimination in employment based on age.
However, certain provisions allow for fair dismissal upon reaching the normal
or agreed retirement age. The case of <a href="https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALCJHB/2023/313.html">Seokwane v Bidvest
Prestige Cleaning Services</a> explores the application of these laws in a
situation where an employee claimed unfair dismissal due to age.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Facts
of the Case:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Bidvest
Prestige Cleaning Services (Pty) Ltd (the respondent) employed Rosy Seokwane (the
applicant) under a fixed-term contract starting in July 2019. She was 62 years
old at the time of employment, exceeding the agreed retirement age of 60
specified in her contract. In June 2020, during the COVID-19 lockdown, her
supervisor advised Seokwane that she would be retrenched due to exceeding the
retirement age. Despite requesting to work until October 2022 to pay off debts,
she was retired on 30 June 2020.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Bidvest
Prestige Cleaning Services claimed that Seokwane was retired due to operational
requirements, as its client, Volkswagen (VW), requested a reduction in staff.
Despite initially hesitating to employ Seokwane due to her age, they relented
at VW's insistence.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Court's
Findings:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
court scrutinized the respondent's actions and determined that the dismissal of
Seokwane was automatically unfair. Despite relying on clauses in the employment
contract and retirement policy, the court found that the respondent's conduct
violated fair retirement practices. The respondent's decision to employ
Seokwane, knowing her age, and then retire her due to operational requirements
was deemed discriminatory. The court emphasized that retirement should not be
used as a pretext for dismissing employees based on other reasons.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
court awarded compensation to Seokwane equivalent to 12 months of her
remuneration, considering the circumstances of the case and the respondent's
failure to provide adequate notice or fair treatment.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
case of Seokwane v Bidvest Prestige Cleaning Services highlights the importance
of fair treatment and non-discrimination in employment, particularly concerning
the elderly. It underscores the need for employers to adhere to legal
provisions regarding retirement and to avoid using age as a basis for
dismissal. The judgment serves as a reminder that employees should be afforded
proper notice and consideration, especially when facing retirement.</span><span style="font-family: Century Gothic, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif;"> </span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-47684155377001589922024-02-21T13:38:00.001+02:002024-02-21T13:38:46.824+02:00Legal duty to ensure safety of exterior premises, Pieterse v FLM SA (Pty) Ltd and Others<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdQ3RApaIZR7hvSbaSAyZbW0P4wU5lSmBbz8eLBNnSR9D3tPECyDkOpODjmIO7DBLg9VIh_l-mIWh3gcmohfNo11WvjBpVeOOLLvCNlxhissUyC8cB3AfYmUSHe7id9a27XwSmfc6Ilgzo_Z1nYYhjnAZAyXoUnwhsQb0q4qS9isBfknrygTBZ/s540/slip%20and%20fall.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="540" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdQ3RApaIZR7hvSbaSAyZbW0P4wU5lSmBbz8eLBNnSR9D3tPECyDkOpODjmIO7DBLg9VIh_l-mIWh3gcmohfNo11WvjBpVeOOLLvCNlxhissUyC8cB3AfYmUSHe7id9a27XwSmfc6Ilgzo_Z1nYYhjnAZAyXoUnwhsQb0q4qS9isBfknrygTBZ/s320/slip%20and%20fall.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 14.4pt; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;">Introduction:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;"> In the case of <u><a href="https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAFSHC/2024/34.html">Pieterse v FLM SA (Pty) Ltd and Other</a>s</u>, the court examined the issue of negligence surrounding a
slip-and-fall incident on an uneven sidewalk leading to a business premises.
The plaintiff sustained injuries and sought damages, alleging that the
defendants failed in their legal duty to maintain safe premises.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 14.4pt; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;">Summary of Law:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;"> The plaintiff argued that the defendants had a
legal duty to ensure the safety of exterior sidewalks and entrances to their
business premises. However, the court found that the presence of a disclaimer
notice and the fair condition of the paving negated claims of negligence. It
emphasized that reasonable expectations regarding pavement conditions should be
considered, and the plaintiff's own negligence was highlighted.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 14.4pt; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;">Court's Findings:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;"> Despite the plaintiff's claims, the court
determined that the defendants had a system in place for repairs and
maintenance, and no previous complaints had been raised regarding the
pavement's condition. Applying the test for negligence, the court found no
evidence of a dangerous situation that the defendants could have reasonably
foreseen, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's claim. Additionally, the
plaintiff's failure to prove the location and cause of her fall, as well as her
own negligence, contributed to the dismissal of the claim.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 14.4pt; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Conclusion:</span></span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 13pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"> The court's decision underscores the critical
importance of evaluating the reasonableness of expectations concerning the
condition of premises. It highlights the necessity for individuals to take
responsibility for their safety and exercise caution. Ultimately, the
plaintiff's claim was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of fulfilling the
burden of proof in cases of alleged negligence.</span><span style="font-family: Open Sans, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-line-height-alt: 14.4pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #64473a; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 18.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-ZA; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-ligatures: none;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-53985780764936208262024-02-12T11:10:00.000+02:002024-02-12T11:10:00.960+02:00Supreme Court of Appeal Upholds Property Owner's Rights in Dispute Over Electricity Supply<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKz3-mhr3JYT2E2nmFDPbswxHpWE6_gTd1YQNrNYSQuZ-ZQJSqXSShGJvpkTgkLxA6_8zbDbckPqSqGME8GM48WLiwincJZm9-Yfmtg4BgKGj4iikK3tKHkKPDI4dsrc7V0RPE_Bl9Sw_ZIA9bsFaHioguVUa51EIiI-BZFS9z6QZY7nFmi5FF/s650/Electricity.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="366" data-original-width="650" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKz3-mhr3JYT2E2nmFDPbswxHpWE6_gTd1YQNrNYSQuZ-ZQJSqXSShGJvpkTgkLxA6_8zbDbckPqSqGME8GM48WLiwincJZm9-Yfmtg4BgKGj4iikK3tKHkKPDI4dsrc7V0RPE_Bl9Sw_ZIA9bsFaHioguVUa51EIiI-BZFS9z6QZY7nFmi5FF/s320/Electricity.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p><span style="font-family: verdana;">Emalahleni Local Municipality v
Lehlaka Property Development (Pty) Ltd [2023] JOL 61480 (SCA)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Summary:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the case of Emalahleni Local Municipality v Lehlaka
Property Development (Pty) Ltd, the Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed that
Lehlaka, a private property owner, had no constitutional obligation to provide
free electricity to unlawful occupiers on its properties. The court upheld
Lehlaka's right to terminate its consumer agreement with the municipality. The
dispute arose when the municipality refused to accept Lehlaka's termination
notice. The court found that the unlawful occupiers had no legal claim in the
termination dispute. It dismissed the appeal, asserting that the municipality
had no administrative duty to provide electricity to the occupiers.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Key Points:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top: 0cm;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Lehlaka,
a private property owner, sought to terminate its consumer agreement with
the municipality after unlawful occupiers utilized electricity on its
properties.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
municipality refused to accept the termination, leading to a legal
dispute.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
court ruled that unlawful occupiers had no legal right to free electricity
from Lehlaka.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
municipality's refusal to accept the termination did not constitute
administrative action under the law.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The
court dismissed the appeal, upholding Lehlaka's right to terminate the
contract with the municipality.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-34491734449242047562024-02-07T12:02:00.002+02:002024-02-07T12:02:25.812+02:00 Ensuring Compliance with PAIA: Khanyile v Director-General Province of Kwazulu-Natal - Assessing the Burden of Proof for Refusal of Access to Information<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0Y48VE7zg2R4BSK9AA-il_AO_wE33FimQxBemVoepL_6wpOW8B3mdty5OztGN7qMI-IcIughxcXgPZVeopZ8AfAkcfpFGsIO4O3eOJPr5QUYGQYpM0GiPXfl-NLg1pdqrosxs-4Yi9xBQh_4AquDZHuN14lBlllDOhlWIYueAWddKvWXNb2Ht/s560/paia.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="265" data-original-width="560" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0Y48VE7zg2R4BSK9AA-il_AO_wE33FimQxBemVoepL_6wpOW8B3mdty5OztGN7qMI-IcIughxcXgPZVeopZ8AfAkcfpFGsIO4O3eOJPr5QUYGQYpM0GiPXfl-NLg1pdqrosxs-4Yi9xBQh_4AquDZHuN14lBlllDOhlWIYueAWddKvWXNb2Ht/s320/paia.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><em style="font-family: verdana;"><u><p><em style="font-family: verdana;"><u><br /></u></em></p>Khanyile v Director-General
Province of KwaZulu-Natal and Others (16707/22P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 119.</u></em><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Introduction:</b> This case revolves around the right of
access to information as stipulated in the Promotion of Access to Information
Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA). The applicant, Khanyile, sought access to records that
the respondents, including the Director-General Province of KwaZulu-Natal, had
refused to disclose.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>PAIA and Right to Access Information:</b> PAIA was
enacted to uphold the constitutional right of access to information, ensuring
transparency, accountability, and effective governance in public bodies.
Requesters are entitled to access records from public bodies, provided they
adhere to PAIA's procedural requirements. Access can only be refused based on
grounds outlined in Chapter 4 of PAIA.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Facts of the Case:</b> Khanyile, as a requester, sought
access to various records, including those related to a Provincial Executive
Committee meeting, forensic investigation reports into alleged misconduct, and
unsuccessful job applications. The respondents, public bodies under PAIA,
refused access citing different provisions of the Act.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Court's Findings:</b> The central issue was whether the
respondents adequately justified their refusal of access under PAIA. Acting
Judge Annandale ruled that the respondents failed to discharge their burden of
proof. The Judge criticized the respondents' unsubstantiated claims,
particularly regarding the inability to locate certain reports. Consequently,
the Court ordered the respondents to grant Khanyile access to the records
within 20 days and imposed costs on the respondents.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b> The case underscores the importance of
thorough consideration of PAIA provisions, particularly Chapter 4, when
refusing access to information. Mere refusal without substantial justification
is insufficient and may result in court orders compelling disclosure. Thus,
public bodies must diligently adhere to PAIA's requirements to ensure
transparency and accountability in governance.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-52541255235227143912024-02-05T13:49:00.000+02:002024-02-05T13:49:04.123+02:00 South African Family Law – Child Relocation Dilemma: Balancing Equal Parental Responsibilities<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdghh0BZPs0GPlAlUvNk8m3Jn4hYmTa6Seuv7XVwSN0lYkX2qbg-QIIetciJDz7VT3L2CcmSD9iE9fU6n55MQPPrJ38_SqdP_fRbtVFNGVz_7V3rpvy5qu6lMgEfhcGfhq1F59i8_tt1tFNtXZ1J0ptt0ctjt9O97UM2DfjVNJIJOzCxeufiOt/s270/child%20tug%20o%20war.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdghh0BZPs0GPlAlUvNk8m3Jn4hYmTa6Seuv7XVwSN0lYkX2qbg-QIIetciJDz7VT3L2CcmSD9iE9fU6n55MQPPrJ38_SqdP_fRbtVFNGVz_7V3rpvy5qu6lMgEfhcGfhq1F59i8_tt1tFNtXZ1J0ptt0ctjt9O97UM2DfjVNJIJOzCxeufiOt/s1600/child%20tug%20o%20war.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><i><u><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><p><i><u><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></u></i></p><span style="font-family: verdana;"><a href="http://saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECMKHC/2023/139.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">DJH v AH [2023] ZAECMKHC 139</span></a></span></span></u></i><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Introduction:</b> In the realm of South African family
law, the intricacies of child relocation amidst divorce proceedings require
delicate consideration of the best interests of the child. This case delves
into the complexities surrounding a mother's desire to relocate with her child
to another province for employment reasons, sparking a legal battle that hinges
on the fundamental question of what truly serves the child's welfare.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>The Law in South Africa:</b> South African family law
emphasizes the paramount consideration of the best interests of the child in
relocation matters. Both parents hold equal parenting responsibilities, and
decisions must account for the potential upheaval in the child's life and the
impact on their relationship with both parents. This legal framework seeks to
strike a balance between the custodial parent's freedom and career aspirations
and the rights of the non-custodial parent.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Facts of the Case:</b> The child, referred to as SH, is a
Grade 5 learner residing in Graaff-Reinet, where both parents currently work
for the same employer. The divorce proceedings between the parties have taken
an acrimonious turn, with the mother seeking relocation to Somerset West, a
province seven hours away. The motivation behind the relocation appears to be
the mother's desire to distance herself from the father, raising concerns about
the potential impact on SH's life and relationship with both parents.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Court's Findings:</b> The applicant, the child's father,
expressed valid concerns about the substantial impact the relocation would have
on his relationship with SH. The family advocate's report, recommending
relocation without sufficient consideration for the equal parenting
responsibilities of both parties, drew criticism from the applicant. The court
noted that the advocate failed to acknowledge the potential upheaval in SH's
life and the absence from the father.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The court discerned that the primary motivation behind the
relocation was to create distance between the mother and the father, with
insufficient consideration for SH's best interests. Despite the mother's
entitlement to assert her freedom and career goals, the court emphasized the
equal parenting responsibilities of both parties and the need to prioritize the
child's welfare.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b> In conclusion, the court, recognizing the
inadequacies in the family advocate's report, interdicted the mother from
relocating with the child to Somerset West. The decision underscored the
importance of considering the best interests of the child, emphasizing that
custodial rights should not override the equal parenting responsibilities of
both parties. This case serves as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance
required in addressing child relocation issues within the framework of South
African family law, ultimately safeguarding the well-being of the child amidst
parental disputes.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-49828490711333926002024-02-01T11:09:00.001+02:002024-02-01T11:09:03.368+02:00Confessions in Employment Law - Brauns and Others v Wilkes N.O and Others<p><span style="font-family: verdana;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEippiQijX-U0J_CGfxxypJto0n8UMmduhxx2vuRtiIrN4RQt-0p4UforqGLLQyZp6gDII2C0WlHznFh5sLnEzuO_eevhx9uPhyx1_TynqRVt1zb2VjF8olATyU4_AGLz4KqmmO0XSrhzxte5D9h0y-XvGO0NjJyByq6T6Omc2vVYsSBH6yYpyTm/s270/fraud%20confession.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEippiQijX-U0J_CGfxxypJto0n8UMmduhxx2vuRtiIrN4RQt-0p4UforqGLLQyZp6gDII2C0WlHznFh5sLnEzuO_eevhx9uPhyx1_TynqRVt1zb2VjF8olATyU4_AGLz4KqmmO0XSrhzxte5D9h0y-XvGO0NjJyByq6T6Omc2vVYsSBH6yYpyTm/s1600/fraud%20confession.jpeg" width="270" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana;"><br /></span><span style="color: #64473a; font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><b>Introduction:</b> In the case of </span><a href="https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/2024/1.html" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><i>Brauns and Others v
Wilkes N.O and Others</i></a><span style="color: #64473a; font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;">, the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) dealt with the
dismissal of former employees from the South African Police Service (SAPS) for
dishonesty related to overtime claims. The appellants, including Mr. Brauns,
were accused of misrepresenting entitlement to overtime payments and defrauding
the state. The LAC upheld the Commissioner's finding that the dismissals were
substantively fair due to the elements of dishonesty destroying the trust
relationship between the parties.</span><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #64473a;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Enunciation of the Law Surrounding Confessions:</b> The employment
relationship imposes an obligation on employees to act honestly and in good
faith, safeguarding the interests of the employer. Courts consistently
emphasize the significance of honesty, considering dismissal for dishonesty
fair when trust restoration becomes unlikely, and dismissal is a reasonable
response to risk management. In Brauns and Others, the court highlighted that
the nature of employment necessitates honesty, making the destruction of trust
through dishonest conduct a valid reason for dismissal.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #64473a;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Court Findings:</b> The appellants, accused of fraudulent overtime claims,
were dismissed by SAPS. The Commissioner, after an internal appeal, found the
dismissals substantively fair, a decision upheld by the LAC. The case featured
a significant element: Mr. Braun's confession, which became a focal point in
the legal analysis. The LAC affirmed the admissibility of the confession,
highlighting the importance of a valid confession in disciplinary matters.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #64473a;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Confessions in Employment Law: The Brauns case sheds light on the legal
principles surrounding employee confessions. A confession, in the context of
labour disciplinary proceedings, is an acknowledgement by an employee of fault,
wrongdoing, or breach of a rule. For a confession to be valid, it must be
freely and voluntarily made without coercion, clear, and unambiguous, and the
employee must understand its consequences.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #64473a;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Key Takeaways on Confessions:</b><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<ol start="1" style="margin-top: 0cm;" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color: #64473a; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Validity
Requirements: Employers must prove that a confession was freely and
voluntarily made without coercion or intimidation and the employee clearly
understood its consequences.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color: #64473a; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Confession
and Dismissal: A confession alone cannot justify dismissal. Employers must
follow a fair procedure and determine if there's a substantive reason for
termination.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color: #64473a; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Fear
of Criminal Prosecution: Whether a confession is valid if made in fear of
criminal prosecution depends on the circumstances. It may be considered
involuntary if influenced by a promise or threat.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color: #64473a; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Access
to Information: An employee's confession can inform charges, but it
doesn't render the confession invalid if made before knowing the charges.
Confessions are part of the investigation.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #64473a;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b> In the Brauns case, the LAC affirmed the validity of Mr.
Braun's confession, considering it was willingly made before an independent
magistrate. The court emphasized that a confession alone doesn't warrant
dismissal; a fair procedure and substantive reasons are essential. Employers
should be cautious when relying on confessions, ensuring they meet the criteria
of voluntariness and clarity. The case underscores the importance of fairness
in employment law, even when dealing with confessions, to ensure just outcomes
in disciplinary matters.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-67145304426756236482024-01-30T08:09:00.002+02:002024-01-30T08:09:30.193+02:00Allied Steelrode (Pty) Ltd v Dreyer: Informal Loans between Friends and the National Credit Act<p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0_CK3FkM1kHCauhGQSp4B5x1q2BaxfO6mh-XAfiTEM3SKsEfAwBdq10ZBREqYyJ-dM0R5pK40tahBh6KtvBrpSFSMH90Uxuw3lSg-qsGX_GVJ7rkoyHPNl-OTjJuoxpOs0ELjIFMeXZu4VVPl8DzdKtz_39YSo7hFXi41Qto38MzTBhHQhmpA/s512/Contract%20signing%20-%20auburn%20lady.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="512" data-original-width="512" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0_CK3FkM1kHCauhGQSp4B5x1q2BaxfO6mh-XAfiTEM3SKsEfAwBdq10ZBREqYyJ-dM0R5pK40tahBh6KtvBrpSFSMH90Uxuw3lSg-qsGX_GVJ7rkoyHPNl-OTjJuoxpOs0ELjIFMeXZu4VVPl8DzdKtz_39YSo7hFXi41Qto38MzTBhHQhmpA/s320/Contract%20signing%20-%20auburn%20lady.png" width="320" /></a></div><b style="font-family: verdana;"><p class="MsoNormal"><b style="font-family: verdana;"><br /></b></p>Summary: </b><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) recently
overturned a decision by the Gauteng Division of the High Court in the case of </span><u style="font-family: verdana;">Allied
Steelrode (Pty) Ltd v Dreyer</u><span style="font-family: verdana;">. The central issue was whether an
acknowledgment of debt (AOD) arising from an informal loan between friends
should be subject to the National Credit Act (NCA) and especially section 89(2)
that prescribes the instances in which a credit agreement is unlawful. The respondents
argued that the AOD was unlawful and therefore void because Allied Steelrode
was an unregistered credit provider.</span><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Background:</b> The dispute revolved around an informal
loan agreement between Allied Steelrode (the appellant) and the respondents,
who shared a close personal bond. The initial loan, sealed with a handshake and
without interest, was later formalized in an AOD. The AOD included terms such
as a six-month grace period before interest would accrue. The appellant sought
repayment of R15 million based on the AOD.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>High Court Decision:</b> The High Court concluded that
the loan and the AOD were subject to the NCA. It rejected the appellant's
argument that a distinction could be drawn between the loan and the AOD. The
court found that the AOD fell within the NCA's ambit, citing interest terms and
deferred payments as evidence of an arm's length relationship, making it
subject to the NCA. The court concluded that the AOD was thus unlawful and unenforceable
under section 89 of the NCA.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Supreme Court of Appeal's Findings:</b> The SCA, on
appeal, disagreed with the High Court's decision. It emphasized the informal
nature of the loan, rooted in a friendship outside business realms, with no
interest charged. The court determined that the parties were not dealing at
arm's length, as required by the NCA. The SCA highlighted that interest was
only payable in case of default, which deviated from typical arm's length
transactions where interest is insisted upon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The court referred to a Constitutional Court case (Paulsen
and Another v Slip Knot Investments 777) stating that loans provided solely to
friends need not be registered under the NCA. Despite the AOD not falling under
the NCA, the SCA concluded it still qualified as a credit agreement. The trial
court's decision that the agreement was void under section 89 of the NCA was
deemed a misdirection. The SCA ruled that neither the loan nor the AOD fell
under the NCA, overturning the trial court's order.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b> In summary, the SCA held that an informal
loan agreement between friends, even when formalized in an AOD, may not
necessarily fall under the jurisdiction of the NCA. The key factors considered
were the absence of interest, the familial relationship between the parties,
and the non-arm's length nature of the transaction. This case underscores the
importance of assessing the specific circumstances surrounding informal loans
to determine their applicability under the NCA.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-23234972201414606922024-01-18T10:50:00.001+02:002024-01-18T10:50:11.073+02:00Unconstitutionality of Immigration Act Impacting Foreign Nationals' Parental Rights<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGnpERquDDTX38UW8kU2_ulYImT58r2CVHlhtk2JLqJKv1zisr5pkJ-KG7K8zTLA_D3KzV0-ODmjrW0FA495iUN1SgGPykme2j-VeB5S7zhA4OHPmZ12zIfurDx-FoP46x0XRwj9MqC5J9JsksfW93GTsZ09EXUEmcKc6f8XCIRzcvM443xErX/s270/Happy%20Family%202.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGnpERquDDTX38UW8kU2_ulYImT58r2CVHlhtk2JLqJKv1zisr5pkJ-KG7K8zTLA_D3KzV0-ODmjrW0FA495iUN1SgGPykme2j-VeB5S7zhA4OHPmZ12zIfurDx-FoP46x0XRwj9MqC5J9JsksfW93GTsZ09EXUEmcKc6f8XCIRzcvM443xErX/s1600/Happy%20Family%202.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p><b style="background-color: white; font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;">Introduction:</span></b><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: verdana; font-size: 10pt; text-align: justify;"> In a groundbreaking judgment on December 4, 2023, the Constitutional
Court of South Africa in </span><b style="background-color: white; font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><a href="http://saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2023/40.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: black; text-decoration-line: none;">Rayment v Minister of Home Affairs [2023] ZACC 40</span></a> </span></i></b><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: verdana; font-size: 10pt; text-align: justify;">addressed the constitutional
challenges posed by the Immigration Act, Act 13 of 2002, in the consolidated
cases of Rayment and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others; Anderson and
Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others. This article delves into the core
issues raised, the court's findings, and the resulting recommendations,
shedding light on the far-reaching consequences for foreign nationals,
particularly those with children who are South African citizens or permanent
residents.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The requirement for foreign nationals to cease working or leave the
country upon the expiration of their spousal visas is at the heart of this
constitutional challenge. The affected applicants, who had been dutiful and
supportive parents, found themselves in a vulnerable position, with their
children's rights and their own rights to dignity compromised. The court's
recognition of the lack of a legitimate purpose for such limitations
underscores the unconstitutionality of the Immigration Act and its regulations.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;">Unconstitutionality of the South African Immigration Act:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"> The essence of the legal
battle revolves around the contention that the Immigration Act inadequately
addresses the predicament of foreign nationals whose spousal visas expire upon
the dissolution of marriages or good faith spousal relationships. This lapse in
the law renders their stay in South Africa illegal, especially when children
are part of the equation. The Constitutional Court identified specific sections
of the Immigration Act, including 10(6), 11(6), and 18(2), along with
regulation 9(9)(a), as inconsistent with the Constitution and thus declared
them invalid.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;">Findings and Recommendations of the Constitutional Court:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"> The court's ruling
emphasizes the undue burden placed on foreign nationals, particularly parents
of South African children, by requiring them to cease working or leave the
country when their spousal relationships end. The identified sections of the
Immigration Act were found to unjustifiably limit fundamental rights, including
the right to dignity of the foreign national, the South African citizen or
permanent resident spouse, and most critically, the child's rights under
sections 21(3) and 28(2) of the Constitution.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">As a remedy, the court suspended the declarations of invalidity for a
period of 24 months. During this time, affected foreign nationals are permitted
to continue working and residing in South Africa while applying for new visas.
This interim measure provides breathing room for Parliament to amend the
Immigration Act to align with constitutional principles and rectify the
identified defects.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;">Conclusion:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"> The cases of Rayment and Anderson underscore a common narrative where
foreign nationals, having built lives and families in South Africa, face legal
limbo upon the termination of their spousal relationships. The court's
intervention acknowledges the intricate intersection of immigration laws and
family dynamics, particularly concerning the rights of children. It is
imperative to explore the implications of this ruling, especially for affected
parties navigating the revised provisions during the 24-month suspension
period.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-77011506145551184992024-01-16T09:24:00.003+02:002024-01-16T09:24:27.529+02:00 Bisschoff NO obo Reyners v PRASA - Navigating Three Courts: Unravelling the Prescription Puzzle in Personal Injury Cases<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRKPiky2I382E_U6pfJx2TnyvRMLDmMSot51K-DtkC2rLNrOr42MfeT7NOA1lm7PvTi3Bn-72Me5vBnySqC6whwR0-BXYplQJQX-tnEvyCRA9bWOuLKo8SxA1xhMeonHa3IXHHmE0-9G9_crRZSneqS93LFDWLcpC4HXEJ6i7iQWAFCqH9Znrd/s270/Litigation%20lawyers%201.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRKPiky2I382E_U6pfJx2TnyvRMLDmMSot51K-DtkC2rLNrOr42MfeT7NOA1lm7PvTi3Bn-72Me5vBnySqC6whwR0-BXYplQJQX-tnEvyCRA9bWOuLKo8SxA1xhMeonHa3IXHHmE0-9G9_crRZSneqS93LFDWLcpC4HXEJ6i7iQWAFCqH9Znrd/s1600/Litigation%20lawyers%201.jpg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b style="text-align: justify;">Summary of Facts:</b><span style="text-align: justify;"> The
legal journey in the case of </span><b style="text-align: justify;"><i>Bisschoff NO obo Reyners v PRASA [2023]
ZASCA 160</i> </b><span style="text-align: justify;">involved a series of court proceedings. Reyners fell from a
moving train operated by PRASA in 2001, resulting in severe head injuries.
Subsequent surgical intervention led to traumatic brain damage, causing
temporal lobe epilepsy, memory loss, aggression, personality changes, and a
permanent loss of cognitive abilities and executive functioning. In 2010, years
after the incident, Mr. Reyners initiated legal proceedings against PRASA. In
2013, a curator ad litem was appointed to assist him with legal affairs, and
within the same year, the curator filed a summons against PRASA.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Trial Court Decision:</b> The
matter proceeded to the trial court where PRASA raised a special plea of
prescription, asserting that Reyners' claim had prescribed, with prescription
beginning from the date of the incident as per section 12(1) of the
Prescription Act. The trial court held that the prescription period did not
commence while Mr. Reyners was under a disability or impairment. Consequently,
the trial court dismissed the special plea of prescription.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Full Court Appeal:</b> PRASA appealed
to the Full court, where the majority upheld the appeal. They substituted the
order with one favouring PRASA, concluding that the special plea of
prescription succeeded, resulting in the dismissal of the curator’s claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>SCA Intervention:</b>
Undeterred, the curator appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). The SCA,
however, took a different stance, overturning the decision of the Full court.
The SCA criticized the majority of the Full court for assuming, in the face of
uncontested expert evidence, that Mr. Reyners possessed the same cognitive
abilities as a person without brain damage or disability. According to the SCA,
this assumption led to a misdirection.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>SCA's Assessment:</b> The SCA
emphasized that the majority of the Full court failed to acknowledge the impact
of Mr. Reyners' complex attention and memory deficits. Despite having some
residual capacity to engage with society, his ability to effectively utilize
his intellectual capacity was hindered. The SCA highlighted the critical
distinction between residual capacity and possessing the cognitive abilities
required for legal action.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>SCA's Verdict:</b> The SCA held that the majority of the Full
court erred in their assessment and ruled in favour of Reyners, emphasizing
that his disability persisted. Consequently, prescription, according to the
SCA, began to run from the date of the curator <i>ad litem's</i> appointment.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b> The legal saga
concluded with the SCA upholding the appeal, thereby overturning the Full
court's decision. This case underscores the importance of considering the
nuanced impact of cognitive impairment in determining prescription periods. The
ruling establishes that, in cases involving cognitive deficits, the onset of
prescription may be linked to the individual's ability to comprehend and act on
legal matters post-disability rather than the date of the incident.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-50320734668625229842024-01-11T14:44:00.001+02:002024-01-11T14:44:08.602+02:00 Analysing the Legal Principles of Prescription in South African Law<p><b></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjngcGRQ6KnQtYoBlmZ119f4RabZKRR28tLCfhvnpgTSDEONLJIqtOjo9xBhV2fLbZG9XyiEl9SC4v6OQtGXR1DAQU1kEoBHNu4wxDoTpPMey_OAqgB7YSZDMaVRWrAcXMNsH9GbQlAf1Urx34TbycYcMElEm2V_QfuQQvh-cGY1m0ovaoUirMp/s270/litigation%20art.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjngcGRQ6KnQtYoBlmZ119f4RabZKRR28tLCfhvnpgTSDEONLJIqtOjo9xBhV2fLbZG9XyiEl9SC4v6OQtGXR1DAQU1kEoBHNu4wxDoTpPMey_OAqgB7YSZDMaVRWrAcXMNsH9GbQlAf1Urx34TbycYcMElEm2V_QfuQQvh-cGY1m0ovaoUirMp/s1600/litigation%20art.jpg" width="270" /></a></b></div><b><br />A Comprehensive Overview of Recent Case Law Developments under the
Prescription Act 68 of 1969</b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Introduction:</b> Prescription in South African law,
governed by the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, plays a pivotal role in
determining when debts become unenforceable. This article delves into the
latest case law developments, shedding light on critical aspects of the Act.
From the definition of "debt" to the nuances of acquiring
"knowledge" and the impact of acknowledgements of liability, we
explore key considerations that influence the prescription period. Recent
cases, such as <i>Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd [2016] ZACC 13</i> and <i>Links
v Member of the Executive Council, Department of Health, Northern Cape Province [2016]
ZACC 10</i>, have significantly shaped the legal landscape.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Summary of the Law:</b> The Prescription Act stipulates
that debts prescribe after 3 years. To prevent losing the right to
enforce a claim, a creditor must initiate proceedings within this timeframe.
Section 12 outlines the calculation of the prescription period, starting from
when the debt becomes "due." Notably, a debt is deemed due only when
a creditor possesses the requisite "knowledge" of both the debtor's
identity and all relevant facts.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Recent case law, such as Makate v Vodacom, has refined the
definition of "debt." The Constitutional Court narrowed it to signify
an obligation to pay money, deliver goods, or render services. This
interpretation distinguishes personal rights from real rights, impacting claims
arising from diverse contractual contexts.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 7.5pt; text-align: justify;">In
the realm of knowledge acquisition, the Links case clarified that, particularly
in professional negligence claims, the party raising the prescription defence
must show the claimant had sufficient facts to reasonably suspect negligence.
Furthermore, the <a href="http://www.clydeco.com/uploads/Files/Updates/Employment/Scenematic_One.pdf" target="_blank"><i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Century Gothic", sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration-line: none;">First
National Bank v Scenematic One (Pty) Ltd </span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Century Gothic", sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration-line: none;">[2016] ZASCA 60 </span></a>case
introduced the concept of "deemed knowledge," emphasizing the
importance of reasonable care in acquiring necessary information.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The acknowledgement of liability, explored in "Acknowledgement
of liability" in a 'without prejudice' communication: <i>KLD
Residential CC v Empire Earth Investments 17 (Pty) Ltd [2016] ZAWCHC 83</i>,
highlighted that 'without prejudice' communications, despite their protected
status, can interrupt prescription under Section 14(1) of the Act. The case
reaffirmed the need for admissible evidence to establish such acknowledgement.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Addressing the commencement of prescription in the context
of contractual acceleration clauses, the case provided crucial insights. It
distinguished scenarios where the debt becomes due immediately upon breach from
instances where the creditor's election triggers the due date. This distinction
emphasized the significance of precise contract language in determining when
prescription starts running.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Conclusion:</b> Recent cases have significantly
contributed to the clarity and legal certainty surrounding the Prescription Act
in South African law. The refined definition of "debt," insights into
acquiring "knowledge," the concept of "deemed knowledge,"
the acknowledgement of liability in 'without prejudice' communications, and the
interpretation of contractual acceleration clauses have collectively enhanced
our understanding of prescription principles.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">These legal developments underscore the importance of
precise language in contracts, especially regarding when debts become 'due.'
Parties must navigate the intricacies of the Prescription Act to protect their
rights and obligations. The courts' nuanced analyses provide practitioners and
litigants with valuable guidance, fostering a more informed and predictable
legal landscape in the realm of debt prescription in South African law.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-28955551026452167022023-12-04T10:10:00.000+02:002023-12-04T10:10:01.973+02:00The Body Corporate's Right to Block Property Transfer: A Case Analysis<p><span style="font-family: verdana;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKquSOmsBzTHXzM5rmYxwr9qmI5Kta4txGWXEpS2VzdAWWPZwmJJXDcceSfNXIDBcSA0V7BbGGZB4ByKLwQKNq34gmPs0XtoMI5xUzZlL6cZ3NONwwLwZifAZr7gZnMYZSTiGAe1_T0BtoOIPVbEZdda2L7aqN-foDtvoXjiOR32-gaPMc9he7/s270/Sectional%20title.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKquSOmsBzTHXzM5rmYxwr9qmI5Kta4txGWXEpS2VzdAWWPZwmJJXDcceSfNXIDBcSA0V7BbGGZB4ByKLwQKNq34gmPs0XtoMI5xUzZlL6cZ3NONwwLwZifAZr7gZnMYZSTiGAe1_T0BtoOIPVbEZdda2L7aqN-foDtvoXjiOR32-gaPMc9he7/s1600/Sectional%20title.jpeg" width="270" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana;"><br /></span><b style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:</span></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In a November 2023 ruling by the
Supreme Court of Appeal, <i><u>The Body Corporate of Marsh Rose v Steinmuller</u></i>,
the court reaffirmed the authority of a body corporate to impede property
transfers by withholding a levy clearance certificate. This power, enshrined in
Section 15B(3)(a)(i)(aa) of the Sectional Titles Act, plays a crucial role in
protecting community schemes. This article explores the case's details, the
legal context, and implications for property owners and buyers.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Summary of the Law Pertaining
to Sectional Titles:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Section 15B(3)(a)(i)(aa) dictates
that the Registrar of Deeds cannot register property transfer without a
certificate from the body corporate confirming full payment or suitable
arrangements. The primary purpose is to safeguard community schemes by ensuring
debt recovery from property owners.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Case Analysis - The Body
Corporate of Marsh Rose v Steinmuller:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Background:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Mr. Steinmuller purchased a
property in a foreclosure auction, where the conditions of sale made him
responsible for charges, including those owed to the body corporate.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Legal Dispute:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The body corporate demanded
R312,903.21 before issuing the levy clearance certificate, leading to a dispute
resolved through Mr. Steinmuller's application to compel the body corporate.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">High Court Decision:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The high court ordered the body
corporate to issue the certificate but required certain actions, including a
security deposit of R250,000 by Mr. Steinmuller.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Full Court and Supreme Court of
Appeal (SCA):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The full court upheld the high
court's decision, but the SCA ruled in favour of the body corporate, deeming
the high court's order incompetent. There was an emphasis on the body
corporate's incapacity to facilitate property transfer.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">SCA's Legal Comparisons:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The SCA compared Section
15B(3)(a)(i)(aa) to Section 118(1) of the Municipal Systems Act, acknowledging
the vital purpose of embargoes in securing debt recovery for bodies corporate.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">SCA's Findings:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The SCA affirmed the body
corporate's right to resist transfer until debts are settled, recognizing the
protective role of embargoes for community schemes.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Cautionary Conclusion:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The potential for abuse
notwithstanding, the SCA emphasized the value of protection for community
schemes. Diluting the provision could jeopardize the financial stability of
these schemes. While not a preferent claim, the embargo provides leverage for
effective debt recovery. Financial institutions are advised to monitor
non-payers to prevent complications in foreclosure proceedings.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Final Thoughts:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">This case serves as a reminder
for property market participants to carefully consider sale conditions and
conduct due diligence. Understanding the implications of outstanding debts and
the body corporate's rights is essential for a smooth property acquisition
process. The legal landscape supports the notion that the body corporate's
right to safeguard the financial health of community schemes remains a crucial
aspect of property transactions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-9881452223733060822023-12-01T12:23:00.002+02:002023-12-01T12:23:44.010+02:00Essack v Sun International: Legal Perspectives on Compulsive Gambling Liability<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijEZIt0mA9rpti6tL61Z8ITSpWGC3I2AtjNqlyLjFTinUrT2Y8muZVNvz39S6-EJUKoLn4fzWhfFsAy_9dVFN1momS2fJ8hfAdD0S1-Gy6PkJ1guHjjDQi0L2N6UjD1LS4rmYw7omm4YXHJv_0VME_0FXkGDIWP8DPA9vA-IMwESxhk013cx0O/s270/Gambler.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijEZIt0mA9rpti6tL61Z8ITSpWGC3I2AtjNqlyLjFTinUrT2Y8muZVNvz39S6-EJUKoLn4fzWhfFsAy_9dVFN1momS2fJ8hfAdD0S1-Gy6PkJ1guHjjDQi0L2N6UjD1LS4rmYw7omm4YXHJv_0VME_0FXkGDIWP8DPA9vA-IMwESxhk013cx0O/s1600/Gambler.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><b style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><p><b style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><br /></b></p>Introduction:</b><span style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"> In the case
of </span><i style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><u>Essack and Another v Sun International South Africa (Pty) Ltd and
Others</u></i><span style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;">, the Gauteng High Court grappled with the liability of a casino owner
for losses incurred by a compulsive gambler. The plaintiff, Essack, sought
damages of R 5.2 million, alleging that the casino, despite his excluded
status, allowed him to gamble and encouraged substantial losses. The court
considered both statutory and common-law duties in its ruling and dismissed his
claim for damages.</span><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The court determined that the
statutory obligations imposed on the casino were designed for the collective
benefit of the community, rather than specifically addressing the challenges
faced by individuals like Essack, who was regarded as the architect of his
financial misfortune. The court pointed out that suggesting the regulations
place a responsibility on the casino implies a scenario where a compulsive
gambler could retain their winnings despite violating the rules, while simultaneously
holding the casino accountable for their losses. Such a proposition, the court
argued, would undermine the intended purpose of the regulations, and fail to
align with the broader public interest, akin to the proverbial impossibility of
having one's cake and eating it too.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Summary of the Law:</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><i>Statutory Claim and the
Madrassa Principle:</i></b> Essack's statutory claim, asserting a violation of
gambling regulations, was dismissed by the court. The judgment contended that
the regulations aimed at criminal offences were societal protection measures,
not grounds for individual claims. However, it's argued that the Madrassa
principle, which examines a statute's language for available remedies, was
overlooked. This could potentially support a damages claim against the casino.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><i>Delictual Claim and the
Reeves Dictum:</i></b> The court rejected Essack's delictual claim based on the
Reeves dictum, stating that the law doesn't protect individuals from the harm
they inflict upon themselves. Critics argue that this dictum is outdated, given
contemporary South African statutes and regulations that mandate protection
against self-inflicted harm.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><i>Comparisons with Foreign
Jurisdictions:</i></b> The court cited foreign cases where no duty of care was
imposed on casinos regarding problem gamblers. However, it is suggested that
the court overlooked Australian and Canadian precedents where such duty of care
was recognised in instances of problem gambling.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><i>Legal Duty towards Problem
Gamblers:</i></b> The court took a stern stance on individual responsibility
over the casino's role in causing losses. Contrarily, it's argued that casinos
have a legal duty, per gambling regulations, to monitor and prevent problem
gambling. These regulations align with the recognition of problem gambling as a
serious issue by the Gauteng Gambling Review Commission.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><i>Precedents on Commercial
Hosts' Duty:</i></b> While South Africa lacks the doctrine of commercial host
liability, cases have established that commercial establishments, including
casinos, must ensure the safety of patrons. This duty, akin to commercial host
liability, demands reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Conclusion:</b> In conclusion,
the Essack case's findings may be contestable, with potential counterarguments
challenging the court's stance. The rejection of both statutory and delictual
claims could be questioned, considering the Madrassa principle and evolving
perspectives on individual responsibility versus institutional duties.
Furthermore, the court's reliance on foreign cases may not fully capture the
nuanced legal landscape surrounding problem gambling. The emerging recognition
of casinos' legal duty to prevent harm to patrons, as seen in other
jurisdictions, raises questions about the adequacy of current legal standards
in South Africa. As gambling-related issues continue to evolve globally, future
cases may prompt a reconsideration of the legal responsibilities of casinos
towards compulsive gamblers, paving the way for a more nuanced and
comprehensive legal framework.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></o:p></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-54927386864188870192023-11-14T09:34:00.003+02:002023-11-14T09:34:33.621+02:00Why SME’s need contracts<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSrSq6grV28He_neeFTunlosAfDwqagGZpN5hjG-KBL6SUwIvuto75zE03Ie_wg2zM4qCWQS6DHQg_1bRd887ajONtLhnD5G-7eRgv192FnpZew8vC2E6HqXfUgGhm6a1LU5ZPx29ylft2gSU3AE75U1GzhGpg9IgI5M9GMNz9WSvLsku7nZQn/s270/Contract%20plumber.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSrSq6grV28He_neeFTunlosAfDwqagGZpN5hjG-KBL6SUwIvuto75zE03Ie_wg2zM4qCWQS6DHQg_1bRd887ajONtLhnD5G-7eRgv192FnpZew8vC2E6HqXfUgGhm6a1LU5ZPx29ylft2gSU3AE75U1GzhGpg9IgI5M9GMNz9WSvLsku7nZQn/s1600/Contract%20plumber.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Just like a person avoids drafting a will (because it’s a
concession to mortality), some business owners avoid concluding contracts (with
employees, suppliers, freelancers, etc.) because they think this is negative
and anticipates problems.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Properly drafted contracts do not create problems — they solve
them. Written agreements are essential for a good working relationships with
providers, vendors, partners and clients or customers. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Why do contracts make sense? <o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">They provide certainty. <o:p></o:p></span></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">A well-drafted contract clearly sets out each party’s
expectations. It helps both parties focus on their business relationship and
removes any uncertainty about their respective rights and duties. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i><span style="color: #343541;">Contracts outline obligations and remedies</span></i><span style="color: #343541;">. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Parties need to know what their obligations to each other are
and what the consequences of failing to perform (breach) may be. E.g., the
contract may state that if one party sues the other and wins, the loser pays
all the costs. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i><span style="color: #343541;">They provide alternative remedies</span></i><span style="color: #343541;">. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #343541;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The contract should provide for alternative dispute mechanisms,
such as an obligation to first meet to attempt to resolve thorny issues, and
that failing, to mediate the dispute or go to arbitration. Usually this avoids
lengthy and expensive litigation and may even restore the trust relationship
between the disputants. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i><span style="color: #343541;">Contracts help you end the business relationship</span></i><span style="color: #343541;">. The contract sets out
when and how either party can terminate the contract (e.g., after a material
breach, a specific time period, etc). This creates certainty. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><i><span style="color: #343541;">Contracts anticipate the unforeseen</span></i><span style="color: #343541;">. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="color: #343541; text-align: justify;">A commonly included clause in business contracts is the “force
majeure” or the “act of God” provision. This clause in a contract sets out the
parties’ obligations and rights in the event of an unforeseeable event, such as
a pandemic, a natural disaster, or any other circumstances beyond their control
that makes it unreasonably difficult to perform under the contract.</span> </span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-2534810051065270372023-11-09T12:23:00.006+02:002023-11-09T12:23:59.383+02:00Unenforceable Clauses in A Marriage Contract<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzteJY1CLNH1dFnskxFlYJC1ZlgN_SkeE90eqBBAMZrZP1xCRWMakrZxGbqMrgl-gc7nPSyvS-aS6NJVi_xCEYSGA4lSN-zHjW3qj7eB_W829lPrGKve6ikAu2e0aTOf4-pFkDtEmVvmTkwFbcOvKZGT1OSAZvK98ji3A0vCS2sRcY2AiTluIm/s270/ANC%20sign%20by%20young%20couple.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzteJY1CLNH1dFnskxFlYJC1ZlgN_SkeE90eqBBAMZrZP1xCRWMakrZxGbqMrgl-gc7nPSyvS-aS6NJVi_xCEYSGA4lSN-zHjW3qj7eB_W829lPrGKve6ikAu2e0aTOf4-pFkDtEmVvmTkwFbcOvKZGT1OSAZvK98ji3A0vCS2sRcY2AiTluIm/s1600/ANC%20sign%20by%20young%20couple.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /> <p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><i><span style="font-family: verdana;">A client asked if he could include a provision in his
antenuptial contract that expressly excludes the right of his intended spouse to
claim maintenance upon divorce.</span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><i>Another
client asked if the contract could contain a clause </i></b><b><i>deterring the husband-to-be from being involved in
an extramarital affair in the future?<o:p></o:p></i></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b>Antenuptial
Contracts: An Overview</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">An
Antenuptial contract (ANC), often referred to as a prenuptial agreement or
marriage contract, is a legal document that couples can enter into before
getting married. An ANC is a way for couples to outline their financial
arrangements, specifying how their assets and liabilities will be divided if
the marriage ends in death or divorce. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Spouses are
generally free to include any provision in their ANC. However, the provision
may not be contra bonos mores (against the good morals of the public), against
nature, reason, public policy, prohibited by any law or purports to take over
the powers of the court. Clauses of this nature will be null and void. An ANC
may not include clauses that are unreasonable, against public policy or
unlawful:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Unreasonable
clauses include ones:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></p>
<ul style="margin-top: 0cm;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">prohibiting a spouse
from working.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">forcing
a spouse to live in a particular area.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">stating
that marital disputes must be referred to arbitration.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">obliging
a spouse to adopt the religion of the other spouse.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">stating
that the parties will not live together as man and wife after the
marriage.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">stating
that neither spouse shall have the right to ask for an order of forfeiture
or share in the accrual of the other’s estate or claim maintenance following
a divorce.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 18.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Against public policy:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Clauses
enforcing a change of religion, gender or race or prohibiting any
association.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">A
clause permitting the parties to commit adultery.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 18.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Unlawful<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 36.0pt; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Clauses
allowing or forcing a spouse to commit a crime.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-outline-level: 3; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Effect of a clause discouraging infidelity<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">May an ANC
include a clause to deter the husband from being involved in an extramarital
affair in the future?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Case law
suggests that one must interpret this type of clause in context. For example,
the parties had been divorced before because of the husband’s involvement in
extramarital affairs.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">An example
of such a clause:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">‘Should it
be proven that A be the cause of a future divorce through an extramarital
relationship, he will (here reflect an obligation on the husband to give the
wife a fixed property, pay her a cash amount, etc.)’<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The court
will enforce this clause as it seeks to preserve the marriage by discouraging
another extramarital affair by the husband.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana;">Summary:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Whether
it possible to include a provision in an antenuptial contract that excludes any
right or imposes an obligation after divorce, its enforceability can be a
complex and contentious issue. It is crucial to seek legal counsel to ensure
that your antenuptial contract is valid and complies with South African laws.
Consulting an attorney experienced in family law will help you navigate this
sensitive and legally intricate process to create a contract that reflects the
intentions and needs of both parties while respecting the principles of
fairness and justice.</span><span style="font-family: Century Gothic, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-ZA; mso-font-kerning: 0pt; mso-ligatures: none;"> </span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-4090332596965842442023-11-09T12:22:00.002+02:002023-11-09T12:22:37.580+02:00 Restraint of Trade Agreements and Business Transfers<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2JUpi3reAV8zyDn1Beg2sa4COqGNAqOc3Qs6msHwu1G2roF8lx6Ow-m6aVmvAd5bEJwWBA-LhRa_C9aeg6pPkMBLfn7JNnLae8Vq33EgV7TpjweFW14Is0fyB9Mrfhs_-6Bum9ASbH95ocUPTyZfgibev2UdaQaWdZgzYzbCUC0OuMBgnNAKA/s270/Restraint.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2JUpi3reAV8zyDn1Beg2sa4COqGNAqOc3Qs6msHwu1G2roF8lx6Ow-m6aVmvAd5bEJwWBA-LhRa_C9aeg6pPkMBLfn7JNnLae8Vq33EgV7TpjweFW14Is0fyB9Mrfhs_-6Bum9ASbH95ocUPTyZfgibev2UdaQaWdZgzYzbCUC0OuMBgnNAKA/s1600/Restraint.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p><b style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:</span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the ever-evolving legal landscape surrounding
restraint of trade agreements and business transfers, two significant cases,
Slo Jo Innovation (Pty) Ltd v Beedle in 2020 and <a href="https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2023/1160.pdf"><span style="color: windowtext;">Avis Southern Africa (Pty) Limited and Others v
Porteous</span></a> in 2023, have set the stage for critical discussions. These
cases concern the transferability of restraint of trade agreements when
employees change employers. While the 2020 case provided one perspective, the
2023 case introduced a different approach, prompting substantial legal debate.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Comparing the 2020 Case with the 2023 Case:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The 2020 case, Slo Jo Innovation (Pty) Ltd v
Beedle, marked a turning point. It established that restraint of trade
agreements included in employment contracts were transferable under the Labour
Relations Act, providing legal ground for such transfers. However, in 2023, the
High Court's judgment in Avis Southern Africa (Pty) Limited and Others v
Porteous presented an alternative viewpoint.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Court's Findings:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the Avis case, the first and second respondents,
David and Belinda Porteous, were central figures. David had worked with Avis
since 1988, and eventually, Avis became part of Barloworld South Africa (Pty)
Limited. David held the position of Chief Operations Officer of Avis's car
rental and leasing business when he resigned in 2023.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Belinda, on the other hand, started her employment
with Zeda in 1999 and later became the Manager of International Sales for the
Avis Rent-a-Car business, a role she maintained after her employment
transferred to Zenith in 2021. She resigned in 2023 with plans to establish a
consulting company in Mauritius, focusing on the mobility and tourism industry.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">A critical issue in the Avis case revolved around
the restraint of trade undertaking. Avis contended that the restraint
undertakings were included in Belinda's Zeda contract and continued to apply
when she was employed by Zenith in 2021. This issue raised the question of
whether the benefit of the restraint of trade undertaking was indeed
transferred to Zenith.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Bester AJ, presiding over the case, was tasked with
determining whether the restraint of trade undertakings had effectively been
transferred. The court's findings were as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Bester AJ emphasized that the transfer of rights
was a factual matter. To prove the transfer of restraint undertakings, the
applicants had to establish that the terms of the agreement between Avis and
Barloworld explicitly included these restraints. The court's decision was to be
based on the parties' intentions, as evident in the wording of their agreement.
In this case, the court was not persuaded that the applicants had effectively
demonstrated the cession of the restraint of trade undertakings to Barloworld.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Bester AJ also distinguished the Avis case from the
Beedle case, highlighting a crucial difference. In Beedle, the Labor Appeal
Court had ruled based on the absence of a business transfer to a third party,
which rendered the question of ceding restraint of trade undertakings from one
employer to another irrelevant.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Summation:</span></span></b><span style="font-family: verdana; font-size: 10pt;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Avis case holds particular importance for
employers looking to enforce restraint of trade agreements, especially in cases
where new employment contracts lack explicit restraint clauses. To succeed in
such cases, employers must establish that both parties intended to cede
restraint of trade undertakings as part of the business's goodwill. In essence,
employers must provide evidence demonstrating that both parties mutually agreed
to these stipulations, even if they were not explicitly articulated in the
contract. </span><span style="font-family: Century Gothic, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-84169104381072544502023-11-07T11:24:00.005+02:002023-11-07T11:24:53.054+02:00Understanding the Shifrin Case and the "Written Variation" Rule in South African Contract Law<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7qeUB9F0Y_BXhiUfk9mqIpozcBMDZ51l34wzUNfQ02YwWpOoIJgUx5KKuqHjFRlQADWamXydKnLKMTAuV4xmgSyIOiGN-XQxS8L5qCJxDivn_KcefKtIe1t9TQmit-gfrinCtj9oLSHTAEIQTRAbDxT2Qb955W2wQ_-uCAY6Zl0RfkdT6wRLt/s512/Contract%20signing%20-%20auburn%20lady.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="512" data-original-width="512" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7qeUB9F0Y_BXhiUfk9mqIpozcBMDZ51l34wzUNfQ02YwWpOoIJgUx5KKuqHjFRlQADWamXydKnLKMTAuV4xmgSyIOiGN-XQxS8L5qCJxDivn_KcefKtIe1t9TQmit-gfrinCtj9oLSHTAEIQTRAbDxT2Qb955W2wQ_-uCAY6Zl0RfkdT6wRLt/s320/Contract%20signing%20-%20auburn%20lady.png" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p><b style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:</span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In South African law,
contracts play a pivotal role in regulating agreements between parties. The <a href="file:///C:/Users/BMA-Laptop/Desktop/SA%20Sentrale%20Ko-op%20Graanmaatskappy%20Bpk%20v%20Shifren%20en%20Andere%20%5b1964%5d%204%20All%20SA%20520%20(A);%201964%20(4)%20SA%20760%20(A)%20at">Shifrin
case</a> is a significant legal decision that has had a profound influence on
how contracts operate. It introduced a key rule that states when a contract is
in writing and includes a provision that requires any changes to be in writing,
any attempts to alter it through oral agreements are not permissible and will
not be legally recognized.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Summary of the
Shifrin Case and the "Written Variation" Rule:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Shifrin case involves
written contracts that incorporate a stipulation mandating written
modifications. Here are the main points:<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 6.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Written Contracts and
Modifications</span></i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">: Many contracts include a provision
requiring that any changes or revisions to the contract be documented in
writing. This is done to avoid misunderstandings.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 6.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">The Shifrin Case</span></i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">:
In the Shifrin case, the parties had a written contract with a provision
specifying that changes must be documented in writing. Nonetheless, one party
attempted to effect changes through verbal discussions.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 6.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">The Legal Rule</span></i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">:
The court in the Shifrin case determined that when a contract insists on
written modifications, all parties must adhere to that requirement. Therefore,
any attempts to amend or annul the contract through oral discussions are
ineffective and will not be legally enforced.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt; text-align: left;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 6.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Implications</span></i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">:
The Shifrin rule underscores the significance of written agreements and
contributes to legal certainty. It restricts the capacity to casually modify a
contract through verbal discussions, particularly when the contract stipulates
that changes must be documented in writing. This rule fosters clarity and
stability.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt; text-align: left;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom: 6.0pt; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 6.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -18.0pt;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">·<span style="font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Exceptions</span></i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">:
Although there can be exceptions, they typically necessitate compelling
evidence to substantiate.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">Conclusion:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Shifrin case and
the "Written Variation" rule have had a profound influence on how
contracts are employed in South African law. They emphasize the importance of
written agreements and ensure adherence to the terms specified in the contracts.
This serves to avert misunderstandings and bolster the reliability of
contracts. While there are limited exceptions, they demand substantial evidence
for validation. In simple terms, the Shifrin case ensures that written
contracts are accorded serious consideration, and any modifications should
conform to the written requirement as set out in the contract.</span><span style="font-family: Century Gothic, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-7452980861375132372023-10-31T11:22:00.001+02:002023-10-31T11:22:27.096+02:00High Court Rules Parental Leave Provisions Unconstitutional<p><span style="font-family: verdana;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqsPpTcOd-0Pjg5uvvi0s7IbdJpRuPowRQ3lpt0Bf0obebFdIjV1AlyAlLSLRhMKT0YQSg9h_Z0lsh301i4YHKTjPf-X15Pbm55yaP3JmIGI5mKFU8fNAIxr1CXk6il9sKcvtycI76iaSvNPf16FT7JXhw1y-bCnehMksIGg6K6XbkjRIgheBs/s270/dad%20and%20baby.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqsPpTcOd-0Pjg5uvvi0s7IbdJpRuPowRQ3lpt0Bf0obebFdIjV1AlyAlLSLRhMKT0YQSg9h_Z0lsh301i4YHKTjPf-X15Pbm55yaP3JmIGI5mKFU8fNAIxr1CXk6il9sKcvtycI76iaSvNPf16FT7JXhw1y-bCnehMksIGg6K6XbkjRIgheBs/s1600/dad%20and%20baby.jpeg" width="270" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana;"><br /></span><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the case of <a href="https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2023/1213.html">Van Wyk and Others
v The Minister of Employment and Labour</a>, the High Court has made a
significant ruling regarding the constitutionality of certain provisions
related to parental leave in South Africa. These provisions were outlined in
the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA) and the Unemployment Insurance
Act (UIF Act), affecting maternity, parental, adoption, and commissioning
parental leave. The court's decision revolves around the discrimination between
mothers and fathers in these provisions, which it found offensive to the
principles of the Constitution.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Examination of the Facts<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The applicants in this case are Werner and Ilka Van Wyk, a married
couple with a child. Sonke Gender Justice, an organisation advocating for
gender equality, and the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) also participated
as applicants. The respondent is the Minister of Labour, responsible for the
BCEA. Mr. Van Wyk is a salaried employee, while Mrs. Van Wyk runs her own business.
They faced a unique situation where Mrs. Van Wyk needed to return to her
business quickly to prevent it from failing, making Mr. Van Wyk the primary
caregiver for their child.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Court's Findings<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The core issue before the court was the alleged unconstitutionality of
sections 25, 25A, 258, and 25C in the BCEA, which address maternity and
parental leave. The argument presented was that these sections are
unconstitutional because they unfairly discriminate against parent-employees,
violating the equality (section 9) and dignity (section 10) provisions of the
South African Constitution.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The contested sections differentiate between three categories of
children: those born of a mother, those born through surrogacy, and adopted
children. Moreover, they differentiate between mothers and fathers, as well as
between birthmothers and other parents. The logic behind these provisions
assumes that one parent is a primary caregiver, and the other is ancillary,
leading to a four-month maternity leave for birthmothers.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The court ruled that providing only ten days of leave to fathers implies
a mindset that marginalizes the father's role in early parenting, which is
offensive to the constitutional principles of dignity. The BCEA did not account
for family models like the Van Wyks', which are consistent with constitutional
norms. Consequently, the court declared the sections in the BCEA to violate
sections 9 and 10 of the Constitution and called on Parliament to address the
inequalities. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The court's immediate solution to eliminate inequality, during an
interim period, is to propose that all parents, regardless of their situation,
enjoy four consecutive months of parental leave, to be shared as they see fit.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">The court directed parliament and the
legislature to address the unconstitutional provisions of the BCEA and the UIF
Act within a period of two years. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 6.0pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Van Wyk case has declared certain provisions in the Basic Conditions
of Employment Act and the Unemployment Insurance Fund Act unconstitutional.
These provisions unfairly discriminated between mothers and fathers, and
between different types of parents and children. The court found that the
discrimination impaired the dignity of fathers and was inconsistent with the
South African Constitution. To rectify this, the court proposed equalizing
parental leave for all parents, allowing them to share four months of leave as
they choose. This decision is a significant step toward promoting gender
equality and addressing discrimination in parental leave policies in South
Africa.</span></span><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-42472195028393214272023-10-30T09:20:00.002+02:002023-10-30T09:20:57.546+02:00 Joint Ownership Termination in Family Disputes: Britz v Sequeira Case<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3FRqO61uPSVnh99j1vCMKQxmO9ZAEINdq39And_rIVnjS02fBs5mn0hVzhquno0kUnyccO0OnDhcuh03qjppbx8HzakMWnFe1uLLQtll9otlntdhOBUIPRa6Eix_joAAUOHVCOUs6kZZUYFNXSEVR0rpzrTfc4gzN8UHFAQn-6txZO8QCM73-/s270/Tug%20of%20law.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3FRqO61uPSVnh99j1vCMKQxmO9ZAEINdq39And_rIVnjS02fBs5mn0hVzhquno0kUnyccO0OnDhcuh03qjppbx8HzakMWnFe1uLLQtll9otlntdhOBUIPRa6Eix_joAAUOHVCOUs6kZZUYFNXSEVR0rpzrTfc4gzN8UHFAQn-6txZO8QCM73-/s1600/Tug%20of%20law.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><b style="background-color: white; font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Introduction:</span></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Joint
ownership of property, especially within families, is a common arrangement.
However, what happens when the relationship sours and the co-owners can't agree
on how to end their shared ownership? This case, <a href="file:///C:/Users/BMA-Laptop/Desktop/%E2%80%A2%09http:/www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAFSHC/2020/81.html">Britz v Sequeira</a>,
explores the intricacies of terminating joint property ownership in such
situations.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Summary of the
Facts:</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Gideon Britz
and George Sequeira, who are brothers-in-law, co-own a holiday home in River
Lodge, Parys. This property includes two exclusive-use areas known as boat
garages. The dispute at hand revolves around whether their shared ownership of
this immovable property should be terminated due to their ongoing conflict. The
property, initially purchased as a holiday home, is part of a sectional title
scheme.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Since January
2016, George Sequeira has occupied the property permanently, denying Gideon
Britz and his family the use and enjoyment of the property, to which they are
entitled as co-owners. In response, Britz initiated legal proceedings to
terminate the joint ownership under the <i>actio communi dividendo</i>.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Enunciation of
the Legal Position:</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">The legal
principles governing the termination of joint property ownership are crucial in
this case. The judge points out that if the property were the sole connection
between the parties, the termination would be relatively straightforward. In
principle, every co-owner has the right to seek the termination of joint
ownership, as stated in <i>Robson v Theron</i>. The requirements for a party
claiming termination include:</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">(a) Proving
the existence of joint ownership.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">(b)
Demonstrating a valid ground for termination, such as a refusal by other
co-owners to agree to the termination, an inability to agree on the method of
termination, or a previous agreement to terminate with the other co-owners
non-compliance.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">(c) Presenting
facts that allow the court to decide on a fair and equitable method of
termination, which could include options like property division, public
auction, compensation, or private auction among co-owners.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Co-owners
typically have undivided shares in the property, which need not be equal. They
are entitled to reasonable use of the property proportionate to their shares.
If the property generates income, profits are distributed according to their
share ratios. Co-owners are also responsible for property expenses based on the
same share proportions.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Court's
Findings:</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">In this case,
the breakdown of the trust relationship between the co-owners is undeniable,
even though they are brothers-in-law, and Gideon Britz is married to George
Sequeira's sister. However, considering the accepted facts, it is not just and
equitable to order the termination of the joint ownership, including the method
of termination at this stage. The main application is not dismissed but is
instead stayed, awaiting the outcome of proceedings in the Pretoria action.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">Conclusion:</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 12.0pt; mso-outline-level: 2; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Britz v
Sequeira case sheds light on the complexities of terminating joint ownership of
property, particularly when family relationships are involved. While the law
provides a framework for such terminations, the court's decision hinges on
fairness and equity in the specific circumstances of the case. In this
instance, the judge decided to delay the termination decision until further
proceedings take place. This case serves as a reminder of the intricacies and
legal considerations surrounding joint property ownership disputes.</span></span><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-84391808818376802102023-10-25T14:00:00.002+02:002023-10-25T14:00:44.359+02:00Constitutional Court Ruling on Asset Redistribution in Accrual Regime Marriages<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVA8nLadgpiJ3jMkPMCTe53WxbMuPTi8ZOC4K1ZLBoDSeaQX-85vd7FvdPlBgD72Juua6gdU2bwmMG6Vs9gZv2wRSdblJfmpqRIB1Pvu1_yUmqc_Ao4STvjrfFlDDebXJyxesJnPh3L9C3x3Mf_AuNZP2iXs5NCfxDouZ_ECgPz6sZq_oM5q-b/s270/Concourt.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVA8nLadgpiJ3jMkPMCTe53WxbMuPTi8ZOC4K1ZLBoDSeaQX-85vd7FvdPlBgD72Juua6gdU2bwmMG6Vs9gZv2wRSdblJfmpqRIB1Pvu1_yUmqc_Ao4STvjrfFlDDebXJyxesJnPh3L9C3x3Mf_AuNZP2iXs5NCfxDouZ_ECgPz6sZq_oM5q-b/s1600/Concourt.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">In this article, we discuss the Constitutional
Court ruling in the case of </span><a href="http://www.saflii.org.za/za/cases/ZACC/2023/32.html"><i><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">EB (born S) v ER (born B) and Others; KG v Minister of
Home Affairs and Others [2023]</span></i></a><i><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">On October 10, 2023, the Constitutional
Court of South Africa delivered a significant judgment in two separate
applications seeking confirmation of orders declaring section 7(3) of the
Divorce Act 70 of 1979 invalid and unconstitutional. The cases, CCT 364/21 and
CCT 158/22 centred on the issue of whether parties married under an accrual
regime may be awarded redistribution of assets by a court, regardless of when
they were married, or whether the marriage ends through death or divorce.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Discussion of the Case:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">CCT 364/21 - Dissolution of Marriage by
Death:<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In CCT 364/21, the case revolved around
divorce proceedings initiated by Mrs. B against her late husband, Mr. B, who
were married under an antenuptial contract that excluded community of property.
During the divorce process, Mr. B passed away, dissolving the marriage. The
primary constitutional challenge was the alleged discrimination in section 7(3)
of the Divorce Act, which only applied to marriages ending in divorce, not
death. Mrs. B argued that this distinction was unconstitutional, as it unfairly
discriminated against spouses married before November 1, 1984. The High Court
found this distinction unconstitutional and ordered an amendment to the Divorce
Act, including redistribution in cases of marriages dissolved by death.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In a unanimous judgment, the
Constitutional Court affirmed the High Court's decision. It found that section
7(3) created an unjustifiable differentiation between spouses married before
and after November 1, 1984, based solely on the date of their marriages. This
differentiation was deemed irrational and unconstitutional. The Court ordered
an interim reading-in of an analogous provision and granted Parliament 24
months to address the issue comprehensively.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">CCT 158/22 - Marriages Before and After
November 1, 1984:<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">In CCT 158/22, Mrs G sought a
redistribution order under section 7(3) of the Divorce Act after her 30-year
marriage broke down. However, she was disqualified from its provisions due to
the limitation that it applied only to marriages out of community of property
concluded before November 1, 1984. Mrs. G argued that this limitation was
unconstitutional as it arbitrarily discriminated against spouses married before
and after the mentioned date. The High Court ruled in favour of the government,
citing the importance of honouring contractual agreements.</span><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In the Constitutional Court, Mrs G
continued her challenge against section 7(3), alleging that it unfairly
discriminated against spouses in different types of marriages, particularly
marriages concluded after November 1, 1984. The Court upheld her challenge,
finding that the differentiation based on the availability of the accrual
regime was rational but created indirect discrimination against women. The
Court ordered the suspension of the declaration of invalidity for 24 months and
an interim severance of the offending differentiation in section 7(3)(a) while
granting Parliament time to address the constitutional issues.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Conclusion:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">In both cases, the Constitutional Court
has declared section 7(3) of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979 invalid and
unconstitutional, allowing for the potential redistribution of assets in
marriages governed by the accrual regime. These rulings have far-reaching
implications for spouses married before and after November 1, 1984. The Court's
decision emphasizes the need to rectify gender-based disparities and grants
Parliament time to enact legislative changes to address the constitutional
issues. These rulings mark a significant step towards achieving greater
fairness and equity in marital property matters in South Africa.</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8143579.post-87436900240695604222023-10-18T14:09:00.003+02:002023-10-18T14:09:38.984+02:00Legal Case Analysis: Lion Ridge Body Corporate v. Alexander - Disconnecting Utilities in Sectional Schemes<p> <span style="background-color: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Century Gothic", sans-serif; text-align: justify;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpauLDPk5kDupsG8fpfvF6wsQkQ06ZUvzND2Z8y791V5OVLglTe0Mgsf6Fubhz_H4i3dZ4QUrJWq08D4LIRPvoS_XnrDUpieZc7gd6C1ZQfFvFeMm2SeV8sA07VuX2_et13XFjLzjTu0MTEp_RevCcrbFEFBulfW-YUxBudqDuG8Sn3DHZ5JzO/s270/landlord.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="270" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpauLDPk5kDupsG8fpfvF6wsQkQ06ZUvzND2Z8y791V5OVLglTe0Mgsf6Fubhz_H4i3dZ4QUrJWq08D4LIRPvoS_XnrDUpieZc7gd6C1ZQfFvFeMm2SeV8sA07VuX2_et13XFjLzjTu0MTEp_RevCcrbFEFBulfW-YUxBudqDuG8Sn3DHZ5JzO/s1600/landlord.jpeg" width="270" /></a></div><br /><p></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">Introduction:</span></span></b></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">The <a href="http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2022/713.html">Lion Ridge case</a>
revolves around a pivotal legal question - Can a Body Corporate within a
sectional scheme disconnect water and electricity services for non-payment? In
this analysis, we will delve into the details of the case, its background, and
the court's findings, shedding light on the intricacies of this legal matter.</span></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">Summary of the Court's Findings:</span></b></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">The Lion Ridge Body Corporate initiated legal proceedings
against Alexander and other respondents, seeking to recover arrear levies,
water, and electricity charges. They further sought an order to disconnect
electricity services to their units and limit water supply to six kilolitres
per month until the judgment debts were settled. Additionally, Lion Ridge requested
that the respondents be held liable for the costs associated with the disconnection
and reconnection of utilities.</span></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">The court, however, denied the relief sought by Lion
Ridge, citing the profound constitutional rights implicated in this matter.
These rights include the right against arbitrary deprivation of property, the
right to sufficient water, the public law right to receive electricity, and the
right of access to adequate housing. The court highlighted that any relief that
limits these constitutional rights is only permissible if authorized by law.</span></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">The crucial legal argument was that neither the Sectional
Titles Act nor the standard Management and Conduct Rules provided the authority
for a Body Corporate to interfere with a member's utility supply. The Act
permits a Body Corporate to enter into agreements concerning utility supply,
but such agreements must align with the legal framework provided.</span></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">In this case, the court emphasized that Lion Ridge failed
to establish any provision within the Sectional Titles Act, a Body Corporate
rule, or an agreement term that authorized the relief they sought. The absence
of such authorization rendered their claims legally untenable.</span></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: verdana;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;">Conclusion:</span></b></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></span></p>
<p style="background: white; margin-bottom: 19.5pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify;"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;"><span style="font-family: verdana;">The Lion case underscores the significance of adhering to
the legal framework when attempting to limit or disconnect utilities for
non-payment within a sectional scheme. While the need to recover debts is
acknowledged, constitutional rights, including property rights, access to
water, and electricity, must be respected. Any relief affecting these rights
must be explicitly authorized by law, be it through the Sectional Titles Act,
Body Corporate rules, or agreements. In the absence of such authorization, as
was the case here, such relief cannot be granted. This case serves as a
significant legal precedent, emphasizing the importance of legal compliance
within sectional schemes when dealing with utility disconnections.</span></span></span><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic",sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>Bregman Moodley Attorneyshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14650323287828700674noreply@blogger.com0