Increasing use is being made of various types of scientific evidence in court. The general requirement for the admissibility of such evidence is relevance. Although expert evidence is considered to be opinion evidence, it is admissible if it can assist the court to decide a fact in issue; provided that it is also reliable. In South Africa, the initial wide judicial discretion to either admit or exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence, has developed into a more narrowly defined discretion under the final Constitution. Examples of scientific evidence, namely, DNA evidence, fingerprints, psychiatric evidence, bite-mark evidence and polygraph evidence are considered and problems inherent in the presentation of such evidence in courts in various jurisdictions are highlighted. An investigation of the presentation and evaluation of evidence in both the accusatorial and inquisitorial systems seems to indicate that the adversarial procedure has a marked influence on the evaluation of evidence / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

The thesis investigates the extent to which cross-border taking of evidence in civil and com-mercial matters in relation to Switzerland, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda is allowed. Such evidence-taking is not only governed by the domestic law of the state seeking evidence abroad and that of the state where the relevant means of proof are located, but also by public international law, and more specifically by the concept of sovereignty. The ad-missibility of the cross-border taking of evidence under public international law depends on whether or not evidence-gathering in civil litigation is regarded as a judicial act, which violates sovereignty when performed on foreign territory, or as a purely private act. In the first case, the evidentiary material has to be obtained through channels of international judicial assistance. Such assistance can either be rendered based on the basis of an international treaty, or through courtoisie internationale. No international judicial assistance is necessary in cases of a so-called “transfer of foreign evidence”, provided no compulsion is applied which infringes the sovereignty of the foreign state. The thesis analyses the taking of evidence abroad based on the Hague Evidence Convention, and the Hague Procedure Convention. It further expounds how evidence located in Switzer-land, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda can be obtained for the benefit of civil proceed-ings pending abroad in the absence of any relevant international treaty. The thesis also exam-ines under what conditions a litigant in civil proceedings in the aforementioned countries may request evidence to be taken on foreign soil. The position of cross-border taking of evidence in civil and commercial matters in the said countries is assessed, and suggestions are made on how such status quo may be improved. The thesis makes an attempt to establish the basic prin-ciples for a convention on evidence-taking in civil and commercial matters between South Af-rica, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda. The development of such principles, however, is only possible once the similarities and differences in the procedure for the taking of evidence and the means of proof in the relevant laws of the aforesaid countries have been identified. / Public, Constitutional, & International / LL.D.

The thesis investigates the extent to which cross-border taking of evidence in civil and com-mercial matters in relation to Switzerland, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda is allowed. Such evidence-taking is not only governed by the domestic law of the state seeking evidence abroad and that of the state where the relevant means of proof are located, but also by public international law, and more specifically by the concept of sovereignty. The ad-missibility of the cross-border taking of evidence under public international law depends on whether or not evidence-gathering in civil litigation is regarded as a judicial act, which violates sovereignty when performed on foreign territory, or as a purely private act. In the first case, the evidentiary material has to be obtained through channels of international judicial assistance. Such assistance can either be rendered based on the basis of an international treaty, or through courtoisie internationale. No international judicial assistance is necessary in cases of a so-called “transfer of foreign evidence”, provided no compulsion is applied which infringes the sovereignty of the foreign state. The thesis analyses the taking of evidence abroad based on the Hague Evidence Convention, and the Hague Procedure Convention. It further expounds how evidence located in Switzer-land, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda can be obtained for the benefit of civil proceed-ings pending abroad in the absence of any relevant international treaty. The thesis also exam-ines under what conditions a litigant in civil proceedings in the aforementioned countries may request evidence to be taken on foreign soil. The position of cross-border taking of evidence in civil and commercial matters in the said countries is assessed, and suggestions are made on how such status quo may be improved. The thesis makes an attempt to establish the basic prin-ciples for a convention on evidence-taking in civil and commercial matters between South Af-rica, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda. The development of such principles, however, is only possible once the similarities and differences in the procedure for the taking of evidence and the means of proof in the relevant laws of the aforesaid countries have been identified. / Public, Constitutional, and International / LL.D.

Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde 'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

Increasing use is being made of various types of scientific evidence in court. The general requirement for the admissibility of such evidence is relevance. Although expert evidence is considered to be opinion evidence, it is admissible if it can assist the court to decide a fact in issue; provided that it is also reliable. In South Africa, the initial wide judicial discretion to either admit or exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence, has developed into a more narrowly defined discretion under the final Constitution. Examples of scientific evidence, namely, DNA evidence, fingerprints, psychiatric evidence, bite-mark evidence and polygraph evidence are considered and problems inherent in the presentation of such evidence in courts in various jurisdictions are highlighted. An investigation of the presentation and evaluation of evidence in both the accusatorial and inquisitorial systems seems to indicate that the adversarial procedure has a marked influence on the evaluation of evidence / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

L'étude porte sur le fondement du lien de filiation et l'équilibrage de ses composantes multiples, dont la vérité génétique et la vérité socio-affective.<p>Elle analyse la place croissante de l'autonomie de la volonté dans la conception de l'enfant, la création, le maintien et les effets du lien, ainsi que la prise en considération marquée de la parenté d'intention, détachée de la réalité génétique.<p>Cet examen est fait tant pour la procréation dite naturelle que pour la procréation médicalement assistée, avec, en particulier, une étude de la réception par le droit du désir d'enfant chez les personnes célibataires ou en couple homosexuel.<p>La parenté est également étudiée au plan de son évolution vers une reconnaissance de l'autonomie de la fonction parentale sous la forme de la parentalité, détachée de la filiation.<p>Le rôle du droit et la transformation de sa fonction sont analysés en parallèle.<p>Enfin, les conclusions développées au sujet de l'engagement parental volontaire sont confrontées aux principes généraux de dignité humaine et d'intérêt supérieur de l'enfant, ainsi qu'aux droits au respect de la vie familiale et à la connaissance des origines.<p> / Doctorat en droit / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Ce mémoire propose une conception narrative du système de justice criminel. Pour ce faire, l’auteure mobilise la théorie narrative suivant laquelle le procès contradictoire est appréhendé comme un concours entre différentes histoires. Le caractère général de cette théorie confère à l’auteure l’espace nécessaire pour analyser et expliquer différents aspects du traitement judiciaire des faits, que ce soit la preuve judiciaire, le processus de détermination judiciaire des faits, l’intervention judiciaire en appel ou encore le droit qui encadre chacun de ces aspects. La notion d’« histoire » favorise l’adoption d’une perspective qui sort du cadre restreint du procès dans lequel la notion de « preuve » est enfermée. La théorie narrative permet ainsi à l’auteure d’expliquer et d’organiser en un tout unifié divers aspects du processus judiciaire comme l’enquête, le dépôt des accusations, la théorie de la cause, le contre-interrogatoire ou encore la façon dont les faits sont d’abord choisis et assemblés par les parties avant d’être administrés et traités au procès sous forme de « preuve ». Appliquée au procès, cette théorie implique une approche holistique de la preuve suivant laquelle la détermination judiciaire des faits est une évaluation de la vraisemblance relative des histoires en compétition. Cela remet en question la vision traditionnelle (ou rationaliste) atomiste de la preuve où les faits sont déterminés suite à une décision sur la véracité ou la fausseté de chacun des éléments de preuve. Le nouvel éclairage qu’apporte cette vision narrative du procès et ses diverses implications mènent l’auteure à remettre en question le bien-fondé de la vision traditionnelle voulant que le procès mène à une détermination judiciaire des faits qui soit exacte. Au terme de son illustration de la valeur heuristique de la théorie narrative, l’auteure revisite sous la perspective narrative les récentes études en matière d’erreurs judiciaires. Elle en conclut que le droit commande au juge d’atteindre une vérité hybride sur les faits, à michemin entre, d’une part, ce qui est survenu dans la réalité et, d’autre part, ce qui permet de conférer un maximum de cohérence aux éléments de preuves effectivement présentés au procès. / This master’s thesis proposes a narrative conceptualization of the criminal justice system. The author employs the narrative theory framework that conceives the adversarial trial as a contest between different stories. This comprehensive theory offers a lens through which the author analyzes and explains multiple aspects of the judicial processing of facts including evidence at trial, fact-finding, appellate review and the law governing these aspects. The concept of “story” allows a broader perspective than the concept of “evidence” which is limited to the trial. This umbrella theory is therefore used to explain, organize and provide a united understanding of various aspects of the judicial system, such as the investigatory process, the laying of charges, the theory of a case, the cross-examinations, as well as how facts are chosen and organized before being presented and processed at trial as “evidence”. At trial, the global perspective of the narrative theory challenges the traditional (or rationalist) atomist approach to evidence, which explains fact-finding as a decision based on the truthfulness or the falseness of each individual piece of evidence adduced at trial. The narrative perspective, rather, suggests a holistic approach – fact-finding is a decision regarding the relative plausibility between two competing stories. Thus, these insights from the narrative theory call into question the traditional assumption that trials lead to accurate findings of fact. After her demonstration of the heuristic value of the narrative theory, the author applies the narrative framework to recent studies on miscarriages of justice. She concludes that the law enables triers of fact to reach only a hybrid truth, halfway between what happened in reality and an assessment of the consistency between the evidence adduced at trial.

No description available.

L’obligation de coopération a été insérée dans le Code de procédure civile en 2016, tirant ses origines de la procédure civile anglaise. Cette obligation est le point d’ancrage de cette étude, qui a pour objectif non seulement de définir cette nouvelle obligation, mais aussi de démontrer sa complémentarité avec le devoir déontologique de coopérer pour les avocats. L’application concrète de la coopération dans la pratique actuelle de la profession découle de ces deux codes agissant en symbiose. Dans la procédure, la coopération a une place de choix à travers la disposition préliminaire du Code et est qualifiée de principe directeur de la procédure. Elle agit complémentairement avec les notions d’abus de procédure et de bonne foi. L’obligation de coopération s’applique à toutes les étapes du règlement : aux modes privés de prévention et de règlement des conflits, au protocole pré-judiciaire, ainsi que lors de la gestion de l’instance. L’obligation de coopération a également des répercussions importantes en matière de preuve civile. Bien appliquée, elle favorise à la fois la recherche de la vérité par la transmission adéquate des éléments de preuve et l’accessibilité à la justice par la réduction du nombre de procédures. Comme devoir professionnel, la coopération a généralement un impact sur la relation avocat-client et appelle l’avocat à se responsabiliser dans l’accomplissement de ses fonctions. Or, le paysage actuel de la pratique de la profession favorise plutôt l’adversité, notamment parce que la marchandisation et la tarification horaire des services juridiques découragent la coopération entre confrères. Selon nous, il existe néanmoins des solutions concrètes afin de favoriser l’insertion de la coopération dans les différents milieux de pratique. / The obligation of cooperation has enacted in the Code of civil procedure in 2016, inspired by the reform English civil procedure. This obligation is at the heart of this analysis which attempts to define this new obligation and to demonstrate its complementarity with the ethical obligation lawyers has pursuant to the Code of professional Conduct. The practical application of cooperation in lawyer’s modern practice is indeed a mix of those two jurisdictions. In the Code of Civil Procedure, the need for cooperation is described in the preliminary disposition and is expressed as a guiding principle of the procedure at article 20 of the Code. It acts simultaneously with the notions of good faith and abuse of process. The obligation of cooperation is applicable at every step of conflict resolution: to alternative dispute resolution, to pre-judiciary protocol and to case management. The obligation of cooperation also has major repercussions for rules of evidence. When followed properly, it improves not only the research for truth by increasing information exchanges; it also enhances access to justice by reducing the time in court. As a professional obligation, cooperation generally has an impact on lawyer-client relationships and invites the professional to take responsibility for the accomplishment of his functions. However, the professional practice’s landscape does not currently promote cooperation between colleagues, notably because of the commercialisation of legal services and hourly billing. In our opinion though, despite the actual context of legal practice, solutions exist to promote a professional culture based on cooperation.

Crime in South Africa is very close to getting out of control. There is a dramatic increase especially in violent crimes such as murder, hijacking, business robberies, house robberies, rapes and armed robberies where innocent people get killed daily. This has the public shivering in fear. The South African Police Service are responsible for the prevention and investigation of all crimes committed. The Detective Service has the unpleasant task of hunting down the criminals that are responsible for committing these crimes. When a crime is committed and a suspect is arrested, the detectives must use all techniques and methods available to them to connect the suspect with the crime. The positive linkage of a suspect with a crime can lead to a conviction in court and one less criminal on the streets of South Africa. One technique that can be used is pointing out of a crime scene. This research is all about the pointing out of crime scenes. / Police Practice / M. Tech. (Forensic Investigation)