Child participation and the right of children to be heard in matters that directly affect them, including in judicial and administrative matters, is a right that is entrenched in a number of international and regional instruments. This right is also entrenched in the South African Constitution that provides for children to be legally represented, at State expense, in civil proceedings affecting them and this includes divorce proceedings. However, this constitutional right is limited to those circumstances where a substantial injustice would otherwise result should such legal representation not be afforded. This thesis examined how the voices of children can be heard during divorce proceedings and makes recommendations as to when children involved in divorce proceedings should be granted legal representation at State expense.

Afrikaans text. / Public, Constitutional, and International / LLM

Thesis (D. Litt. et Phil.)--Universiteit van Suid-Afrika, 2002.

Text in Afrikaans / Constitutional, International and Indigenous Law / LLM

Law / Thesis (LL.M.)--University of South Africa, 1997.

LL.M. (Banking Law) / It has long been the vogue that the traditional fraud exception is the only exception capable of defeating the doctrine of independence in documentary-credit and performance-guarantee practice. The reason for this is self-explanatory, for it has been stated authoritatively that fraud unravels all. And on construction, this must be the correct legal position. Even then however, the fraud exception is not in itself unassailable. Given the nature and exigency of the contractual relationships peculiar to documentary credits and performance guarantees, it is indubitable for their success that these unique contractual relationships be independent of one another. The latter argument is well established in the law and practice of many jurisdictions. Commercial comity, aspirations, expediency, fair trading and a measure of certainty, inter alia, dictate the necessity for the sanctity and preservation of the doctrine of independence. Without such certainty, international commercial enterprise and entrepreneurship will be the victims. Nevertheless, it would still be fair to state that there is a broad consensus within various jurisdictions regarding the application of a fraud exception to the doctrine of independence, which simply cannot be said for an exception based on unconscionability. There are cogent reasons for this disparity, some in favour of and some against an unconscionability exception. The question which begs an answer is whether the recognition of such an exception would erode the certainty and cash characteristics, inherent and integral to documentary credit and performance guarantee practice. These instruments were, after all, designed and predicated upon tenets of certainty and considered as immediately redeemable cash. Ultimately, this debate involves a choice between embracing commercial certainty on the one hand, and fairness on the other hand. In South Africa however, unconscionability does not exist as a specific concept of law with wide and uncertain parameters. But, the concept of good faith, equally confusing, awkwardly finds its place in the South African general law of contract, but in an informative capacity to the substantive requirements of the law, and not as an independent general defence. A defence in the general law of contract in South Africa, premised on the lack of good faith is bad in law, given the established brocards such as inter alia, caveat subscriptor, caveat emptor, pacta sunt servanda, 5 and the contra proferentem rule. South African legal heritage and precedent have jettisoned the exceptio doli generalis, and this precedent is peculiarly protected by the judiciary at the highest level. Good faith, in the South African context, is not the equivalent of the so called doctrine of unconscionability analysed and discussed in the academic literature and court decisions of certain common-law jurisdictions, but the exceptio doli generalis may have been, or rather, if properly developed, could have been. And so, from a South African perspective, there is the added difficulty of considering the introduction of a foreign broad-based, uncertain and undefinable doctrine grounded in equity, when the narrowly defined concept of good faith, only informative of the substantive law, finds no general application in the law of contract in South Africa. Regard will thus be had to inter alia: the nature, scope and elements (facta probanda) of this exception; certain arguments for and against its recognition; its inability to be defined with the necessary precision required for legal efficacy and practice; its lack of certainty being in essence descriptive of a host of other conduct short of fraud and inclusive of fraud; and whether the case for its recognition might perhaps have merit and applicability in relation to performance guarantees, separate and distinct from documentary credits.

LL.M. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts by Dissertation to the School of Social Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, 2016 / This dissertation is an investigation of the conditions that would bring about the legal enforcement of the right to access sufficient food in South Africa as premised on the Constitution. This is motivated by the fact that modern-society has seen a gradual increase in the occurrence of socio-economic rights being protected through the legal opportunity structure of countries, ultimately leading to public interest litigation. At present, the right to food is being violated in South Africa. Taking into account the ambit of the constitution and several international instruments that speak to its realisation and the fact that there has been litigation on other socio-economic rights, suggesting that tools for litigation are in place, it is perplexing that right to food litigation has not taken place. The research question of this paper is therefore: which factors and conditions would have to be present for there to arise public interest litigation on the right to food in South Africa? Due to the fact that literature on right to food litigation is almost non-existent, especially for the African context, this is an explorative case study. The dissertation utilises an analytical framework to study the prospect of litigation on the right to food becoming a reality. The study is largely theory-driven, relying on various sources of evidence: secondary literature, conducted-research and official state documents speaking to the countries right to food narrative. The analysis reveals that there are many barriers to right to food litigation in South Africa. These mainly have to do with the conditions that impact the manner in which right to food violations are understood by the poor and marginalised in society on one hand and the responsiveness of the courts to the voice of the marginalised and poor on the other. The dissertation concludes that the most crucial factors for right to food litigation in South Africa to arise are the need for more information and awareness around the right to food; improved legal assistance for the hungry and poor; more trust in the legal system amongst those at the bottom of the pyramid; the need for a stronger focus on litigation strategies by civil society and advocacy groups and the need for judges to be more innovative in carrying-out their duties. The conclusions of this study have relevance for those working actively for the promotion and realisation of the right to food in South Africa. / GR2017

Thesis (LL.M.)--University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Law, 1998. / This thesis explores the democratic legitimacy of the power of judicial review. It discounts the countermajoritarian dilemma on the basis that constitutional democracy means more than majoritarianism, it entails judicial protection of other characteristics fundamental to democracy from invasion even by a majority government. Such characteristics include political processes and values which ensure the continuation of democratic rule. The Court may, however, be criticised if it exercises its power of judicial review in a manner which is undemocratic. I argue that the Court is obliged to exercise its power in a manner which respects the doctrine of separation of powers. In interpreting the Constitution, the Court is therefore obliged to show deference to Parliament by giving effect to the purpose of a constitutional provision. I conclude that the Court may only have recourse to the values which the legislature chose to include in the Constitution, except when the Court protects those political processes and values which ensure the survival of constitutional democracy.

A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Arts, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg for the degree of Master of Art (Clinical Psychology), Johannesburg, June 1991 / The literature in this area suggest that the legal profession has inconsistent contradictory and essentially ambivalent attitudes towards psychological testimony in court. This study seeks to begin an exploration and descriptiion of the attitudes of a subsection of that profession viz advocates, to psychological testimony in court. [Abbreviated Abstract. Open document to view full version] / GR2017