This thesis explores the often overlooked nature of public law duty and its relationship with the doctrine of standing in English law. Drawing on English and North American legal tradition and thought, it posits that public law obligations should be reconceived of as fiduciary in nature, vesting correlative enforcement rights in citizens to constrain unlawful exercises of public power. This should correspond to the abolition of standing requirements and recognition of the rights of citizens and interest groups to bring administrative and human rights challenges before the courts. This thesis also aims to achieve some synthesis between liberal normativism and communitarianism by recognizing both the individual and the collective interests at stake in public interest litigation.

This thesis explores the often overlooked nature of public law duty and its relationship with the doctrine of standing in English law. Drawing on English and North American legal tradition and thought, it posits that public law obligations should be reconceived of as fiduciary in nature, vesting correlative enforcement rights in citizens to constrain unlawful exercises of public power. This should correspond to the abolition of standing requirements and recognition of the rights of citizens and interest groups to bring administrative and human rights challenges before the courts. This thesis also aims to achieve some synthesis between liberal normativism and communitarianism by recognizing both the individual and the collective interests at stake in public interest litigation.

The study was designed to ascertain the tax supported cost of implementing collective bargaining in Indiana School Corporations in 1975. Two research questions were developed: (1) What was the statistically estimated direct cost to taxpayers attributable to implementation of Indiana Public Law 217 in 1975, and (2) what was the relationship between school corporation size and costs factors pertaining to implementation of Indiana Public Law 217.A questionnaire was designed, to obtain actual and/or estimated costs of administrative and clerical man-hours utilized to implement collective bargaining, costs of consultants and/or legal services, training workshops and materials, equipment and expendable materials. The questionnaire was sent to approximately one-half of the school superintendents in randomly selected Indiana School Corporations with large, medium and small size pupil enrollments.Useable responses were obtained from 93 out of 153 potential participants (60.7 percent), which included 13 reports that no bargaining occurred in 1975. Information from each questionnaire received was sorted and tabulated by means of a computer program especially designed for the purposes of the study. The total cost of implementing bargaining within each school corporation, the total and average cost of implementing bargaining within the groups of large, medium and small size school corporations, and within the entire set of respondents were found and analyzed.Findings derived from the present study indicate that the average cost of implementing bargaining in large size Indiana school corporations, as reported by 28 superintendents, was $10,839. The average cost of implementing bargaining in medium size school corporations, as reporter: by 32 superintendents, was $6,128 and the average cost of implementing bargaining in small school corporations, as reported by 20 superintendents, was $3,761 per school corporation. The average cost of implementing collective bargaining within the set of respondents, as reported by 80 superintendents, was $7,185 per school corporation. The total direct cost of implementing collective bargaining, determined by extending the average cost to all school corporations believed to have engaged in collective bargaining, was $2,047,725.The major conclusions were that: If all 305 Indiana school corporations had bargained and experienced expenses comparable to the reported expenses, implementation of collective bargaining would have cost taxpayers $2,191,425 and would have consumed 158,905 man-hours by administrators, clerical personnel and members of boards of trustees.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / Judicial remedies are, amongst others, a vehicle through which respect, protection, promotion and fulfilment of human rights can be delivered to those who need them. A remedy is the perspective from which litigants judge either the success or failure of judicial decisions. Judicial remedies make the rights whole, they complete the justiciability of human rights because without them human rights remain statements of legal rhetoric. The nature of the remedies that the courts grant is not only based on the normative nature of the rights they seek to enforce. They are also influenced by factors such as the goals and objectives of judicial remedies as defined, amongst others, by the ethos of either corrective or distributive forms of justice. This thesis explored these factors and their impact on judicial remedies. Stress is put on the impact of the separation of powers doctrine, institutional competence concerns and on the forms of justice pursued by courts. The study is based on the judicial enforcement of the socio-economic rights protected in the South African 1996 Constitution. The research undertaken here was intended to guide scholars, legal practitioners and judicial officers who confront socio-economic rights issues as part of their daily work. / South Africa

La tutelle administrative sur les universités mérite une attention particulière en raison de son statut et de sa tonalité très particuliers. Elle recèle une part de mystère qu'il faut lever pour bien en comprendre les enjeux. D'un côté, la tutelle sur les universités est, sur bien des points, justifiée et légitimée par des traditions et des pratiques anciennes ; celles-ci souvent contradictoires avec la lettre des textes qui la réglementent, d'un autre côté, la tutelle répond à une finalité classique du droit administratif : assurer un contrôle de la décentralisation. Le pouvoir de tutelle sur les universités est déconcertant car cette notion, imprécise et indéterminée, est au centre d'intérêts, a priori, divergents. Alors que l'autonomie des universités et l'indépendance des universitaires semblent militer contre l'existence et l'exercice d'un pouvoir de tutelle, la préservation des intérêts du service public et de son unité est, au contraire, favorable à l'existence d'une tutelle sur les universités. Ainsi, la tutelle universitaire se dévoile sous un jour inattendu qui manifeste son ambivalence : à la fois protectrice, face aux universités, de certains intérêts généraux, et protectrice, face à l'Etat, de l'autonomie universitaire. / The administrative supervision of universities deserves a particular attention due to its status and its very particular meanings. It reveals a part of uncertainty that should be analysed in order to understand the stakes. On one hand, administrative supervision is on many points justified and legitimated by ancient traditions and practices; these often contradict the letter of the texts that regulate them. On the other hand, the supervision answers a classic purpose of public law: to ensure a control of decentralisation. The supervision power over universities is surprising because this notion, imprecise and undetermined, is at the centre of a priori divergent interests. Whereas the autonomy and independence of universities seems to militate against the existence and exercise of a supervision power, the preservation of public service interests and unity is, on the contrary, in favour of university supervision.Thus, university supervision has a new meaning, which underlines its ambivalence: it protects both general interest against universities and university's autonomy against the state. A double movement is therefore initiated, which sees university law irrigating public law and the latter irrigating the former too.

The Constitution of Zimbabwe of 2013 does not expressly guarantee every person a right to have access to adequate housing. However, the Government of Zimbabwe has an international legal obligation to achieve the progressive realisation of the right to have access to adequate housing by everyone in the country. This obligation is derived from art 11 (1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Zimbabwe is a dualist state and therefore, this obligation is not directly or automatically enforceable as municipal law in Zimbabwe. It can be enforced in domestic courts only if it has been enacted into legislation or if it is entrenched as a constitutional obligation. The absence of a specific constitutional right, guaranteed for everyone to have access to adequate housing, thus raises the concern that the government may not be held accountable, in the domestic courts, to comply with its international legal obligation to ensure that everyone enjoys access to adequate housing. There is a national housing crisis in Zimbabwe that is characterised by an acute shortage of adequate housing, mass forced evictions and unfair discrimination in the allocation of housing facilities by government. There is therefore an existing need to compel government to comply with and fulfil its international legal obligations relating to the right of every person to have access to adequate housing. In the absence of an explicit constitutional guarantee of such a right, it is necessary to find alternative constitutional rights which citizens and individuals in Zimbabwe can rely on to compel Government to comply with and fulfil its international legal obligations that arise from art 11 (1) of the ICESCR. The Constitution of Zimbabwe expressly guarantees for everyone the following rights; the fundamental freedom from arbitrary evictions, the right to life, the right to equality and the children’s right to shelter. The scope of each of these rights can be interpreted broadly to include some of the duties that ordinarily arise from the right to have access to adequate housing. Therefore, these rights can be applied together to enforce the international legal duty of the state to ensure the progressive realisation of the right to have access to adequate housing by everyone in Zimbabwe.

In the 12 years since the passage of Public Law 99-457, early intervention systems have greatly expanded and are now stabilizing. This article examines the resulting entitlements for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers currently extended by all states. Perspectives from the legislative process, federal and state implementation, judicial interpretation, and professional views are included. Distinctions among the key provisions for differing early intervention service systems are presented. Influential Office of Special Education letters and significant legal cases are reviewed. Finally, essential standards for viewing entitlements are presented to assist an interdisciplinary audience to explore the question, "Entitled to what?".

Thesis (LLD (Public Law))—University of Stellenbosch, 2008. / Aggression is regarded as one of the core crimes under customary international law, but the definition of aggression is still contentious. At present there is no international instrument that provides for effective individual criminal liability for the crime of aggression. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) provides for the inclusion of the crime of aggression within the court’s jurisdiction, but the Statute needs to be amended to include a definition of aggression and conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction by the ICC. This dissertation seeks to identify the elements of the international crime of aggression, for purposes of individual criminal liability. It is submitted that the creation of the ICC provides the international community with an historic opportunity to establish effective jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2014. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Inaedificatio entails that movables that have been permanently attached to land through building cease to exist as independent things and become part of the land. Courts have adopted different approaches over time to investigate whether or not inaedificatio had occurred. It is sometimes said that courts have moved away from the so-called traditional approach, which focused on the objective factors, to the so-called new approach, which places more emphasis on the subjective intention of the owner of the movables. This thesis analyses the applicable case law and concludes that there is inadequate proof of such a shift since both older cases associated with the traditional approach and later cases associated with the new approach emphasise the intention of the owner of the movables to establish whether accession had taken place. However, the case law does allow for a cautious different conclusion, namely that a certain line of both older and new cases emphasise the owner of the movable’s intention for commercial policy reasons, specifically to protect ownership of the movables in cases where ownership had been reserved in a credit sale contract. Constitutional analysis of these conclusions in view of the FNB methodology indicates that the courts’ decision to hold that accession had in fact occurred in cases that do involve permanent attachment of movables to land will generally establish deprivation of property for purposes of section 25(1) of the Constitution, but such deprivation would generally not be arbitrary since there would be sufficient reason for it. However, in cases where the courts decide that there was no accession because ownership of the movables had been reserved subject to a credit sale agreement, there is no deprivation of property because the landowner, who is the only one who might complain about the decision, could not prove a property interest for purposes of section 25(1). Moreover, the courts’ decision that accession had either occurred or not does not amount to expropriation under section 25(2) of the Constitution because there is no common law authority for expropriation. Therefore, the principal conclusion of the thesis is that the courts’ decision that accession had either occurred or not would generally be in line with the property clause of the Constitution. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Inaedificatio behels dat roerende sake wat permanent deur bebouing aan grond vasgeheg is ophou bestaan as selfstandige sake en deel word van die grond. Die howe het in die verlede verskillende benaderings gevolg in hulle pogings om vas te stel of inaedificatio plaasgevind het. Daar word soms beweer dat die howe wegbeweeg het van die sogenaamde tradisionele benadering, wat op die objektiewe faktore gefokus het, na die sogenaamde nuwe benadering waarin die klem op die eienaar van die roerende goed se bedoeling val. Hierdie verhandeling analiseer die toepaslike regspraak en kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat daar onvoldoende bewys van so ‘n verskuiwing bestaan, aangesien sowel ouer sake wat met die tradisionele benadering geassosieer word en later regspraak wat die nuwe benadering sou volg klem op die eienaar van die roerende sake se bedoeling plaas. Die regspraak bied wel bewyse vir ‘n versigtige gevolgtrekking op ‘n ander punt, naamlik dat bepaalde ouer en later sake die eienaar van die roerende goed se bedoeling vir kommersiële beleidsredes beklemtoon, spesifiek in gevalle waar eiendomsreg in ‘n kredietkoop voorbehou is. Grondwetlike analise van hierdie gevolgtrekkings in die lig van die FNB-metodologie suggereer dat die howe se beslissing dat aanhegting wel plaasgevind het in gevalle waar permanente aanhegting van roerende goed aan grond ter sprake was oor die algemeen ‘n ontneming van eiendom vir doeleindes van artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet sal daarstel, maar aangesien daar oor die algemeen voldoende rede vir die ontneming is sal dit nie arbitrêr wees nie. Aan die ander kant, waar die howe beslis dat daar geen aanhegting was nie omdat eiendomsreg van die roerende goed vir sekerheid onderhewig aan ‘n kredietkoop voorbehou is, is daar geen ontneming van eiendom nie omdat die grondeienaar, die enigste party wat beswaar teen die beslissing mag maak, nie ‘n eiendomsbelang vir doeleindes van artikel 25(1) kan bewys nie. Verder stel die howe se beslissing dat aanhegting óf plaasgevind het al dan nie in elk geval geen onteiening daar nie aangesien daar geen magtiging vir onteiening in die gemenereg bestaan nie. Die gevolgtrekking van die verhandeling is dat die howe se beslissing dat aanhegting óf plaasgevind het al dan nie oor die algemeen nie in stryd met die eiendomsbepaling in die Grondwet sal wees nie.

Thesis (LLD )--Stellenbosch University, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This dissertation considers the housing rights of unlawful occupiers in the post-1994 constitutional dispensation. Section 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 affords everyone a right of access to adequate housing. This provision is a decisive break with the apartheid past, where forced eviction banished black people to the periphery of society. The central hypothesis of this dissertation is that the Constitution envisages the creation of a society that is committed to large-scale transformation. This dissertation posits that it is impossible to realise the full transformative potential of section 26 of the Constitution in the absence of an independent and substantive understanding of what it means to have access to adequate housing. This dissertation traverses legal theory as well as the common law of evictions, constitutional law and international law. A consciously interdisciplinary approach is adopted in seeking to develop the content of section 26 of the Constitution, drawing on literature from social and political science. This dissertation develops an organising framework for giving substantive content to section 26(1) of the Constitution with reference to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; the Revised European Social Charter, the American Convention on Human Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This dissertation shows that the adjudication of eviction disputes has moved away from a position under the common law where Courts had no discretion to refuse eviction orders based on the personal circumstances of the squatters. The adjudication of the eviction of unlawful occupiers now requires a context-sensitive analysis that seeks to find concrete and case-specific solutions. These solutions are achieved by considering what would be just and equitable for both the land owner and the unlawful occupiers. This dissertation also shows that the government has a markedly different role to fulfil in post-apartheid evictions through the necessary joinder of local authorities to eviction proceedings, meaningful engagement with unlawful occupiers and the provision of alternative accommodation in terms of its constitutional and statutory obligations. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie proefskrif ondersoek die behuisingsregte van onregmatige okkupeerders in die post-1994 grondwetlike bedeling. Artikel 26 van die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika, 1996 gee elke persoon die reg op toegang tot geskikte behuising. Hierdie bepaling is ‘n duidelike breuk met die apartheid-verlede waar gedwonge uitsettings swart mense na die periferie van die samelewing verban het. Die sentrale hipotese van hierdie proefskrif is dat die Grondwet beoog om ‘n samelewing te skep wat verbind is tot grootskaalse transformasie. Hierdie proefskrif voer aan dat dit onmoontlik is om die volle transformerende potensiaal van artikel 26 van die Grondwet te verwesenlik in die afwesigheid van ‘n onafhanklike en substantiewe begrip van wat dit beteken om toegang tot geskikte behuising te hê. Hierdie proefskrif deurkruis regsteorie sowel as die gemenereg ten aansien van uitsettings, staatsreg and internasionale reg. ‘n Doelbewuste interdisiplinêre benadering word gevolg in die soeke na die ontwikkeling van die inhoud van artikel 26 van die Grondwet met verwysing na literatuur uit die sosiale- en politieke wetenskappe. Die proefskrif ontwikkel ‘n organiserende raamwerk waarmee substantiewe inhoud aan artikel 26(1) van die Grondwet verleen kan word met verwysing na die Internasionale Verdrag op Ekonomiese, Sosiale en Kulturele Regte; die Konvensie vir die Beskerming van Menseregte en Fundamentele Vryhede; die Hersiene Europese Sosiale Handves; die Amerikaanse Konvensie op Menseregte en die Afrika Handves op Mense en Persoonsregte. Hierdie proefskrif wys dat die beregting van uitsettingsdispute wegbeweeg het van ’n posisie onder die gemenereg waar howe geen diskresie gehad het om uitsettingsbevele te weier op grond van die persoonlike omstandighede van die plakkers nie. Die beregting van uitsettingsdispute vereis nou ‘n konteks-sensitiewe analise wat strewe daarna om konkrete oplossings te vind. Hierdie oplossings word bereik deur in ag te neem wat reg en billik sal wees vir beide die eienaar en die onregmatige okkupeerders. Die proefskrif wys ook dat die regering ‘n merkbaar nuwe rol vervul in post-apartheid uitsettings deur die noodsaaklike voeging van munisipaliteite tot uitsettings, sinvolle interaksie met onregmatige okkupeerders en die voorsiening van alternatiewe akkommodasie in terme van grondwetlike and statutêre pligte.