The business judgment rule is used by American courts to establish whether a director has fulfilled his duty of care. It is based on the concept that the directors are legally empowered to manage a corporation's affairs, and the courts accordingly do not interfere with the exercise of those powers unless a board's action is tainted by fraud or self-interest. The courts will not review a business decision where, acting in good faith, the board has truly applied itself to making an informed decision. In certain circumstances, where self-interest on the part of directors is more likely to be a factor, a stricter test is applied. The business judgment rule is implicit in the judgments of English and South African courts and the King Committee has recommended its formal recognition in South Africa. The need for such formal recognition and stricter interpretation of the duty of care and skill discussed. / Private Law / LL.M.

Text in Afrikaans / The Companies Act, 1973 ("the Act") contains no specific provision dealing with the relationship between a nominee shareholder and its principal, the beneficial shareholder. The Act merely contains a variety of references to this unique relationship without specifying the content thereof or elaborating on the rights of the beneficial shareholder. It is clear from the Act that no legal connection exists between the company and the beneficial shareholder and a company is only obliged to recognise its registered members. It has become apparent that beneficial shareholders need more protection than is currently afforded to them in terms of our common law. Currently beneficial shareholders have a common law right to claim return of their shares from any person (even bona fide third parties) in the event of the misappropriation of such shares by their nominee shareholders. Beneficial shareholders are unprotected if their nominee shareholders were to act contrary to their instructions, for example by not voting at the general meeting in accordance with the instructions of the beneficial shareholders. Having regard to the fact that the relationship between the beneficial shareholder and the nominee shareholder is based on agency or trusteeship, the beneficial shareholder will be entitle to compel its nominee to transfer the shares to another person. This may, however, have stamp duty implications and if the nominee refuses to give its cooperation in respect of such transfer, costly legal action may be the only solution for the beneficial shareholder. In deciding which section of the Act should be adapted to include the rights of beneficial shareholders, the following sections have been considered: Section 266 (statutory derivative action), section 252 (statutory remedy in the event of prejudice), section 440K (compulsory acquisition of securities of minorities) and section 344(h) (liquidation on grounds of equity). The only one of these sections which provides the court with a wide enough discretion to afford the required protection is section 252. An important point in this regard is that section 252 cannot effectively be extended to beneficial shareholders unless they also acquire the right to have access to the same company information as the members of the company would receive. In an attempt to create a balance between the needs to greater protection of beneficial shareholders and the avoidance of unnecessary cumbersome administrative obligations on companies, it is suggested that a register of beneficial shareholders be created and that companies be obliged to inform all beneficial shareholders appearing on such register of the same company information as is provided to registered members. The Act must make it clear that : • a beneficial shareholder can only be recorded in the register with the assistance of its nominee shareholder; • the relevant nominee shareholder must satisfy the company secretary that the person which is recorded in the register is in fact its principal; • the only two instances where the company secretary will be entitled to remove the beneficial shareholder is in the first instance where the beneficia] shareholder consents to such removal and secondly where the shares held by the registered member is transferred. The latter ground will avoid continued provision of company information to persons not involved with the company. No duty will be placed on companies to ensure that the names and addresses of beneficial shareholders are correct. This will be the responsibility of beneficial shareholders. The improved flow of company information will facilitate the improved awareness by beneficial shareholders of relevant events and together with the appropriate extension of section 252, will go a long way in improving the much needed protection of beneficial shareholders. / Mercantile Law / LL.M. (Handelsreg)

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2014. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this thesis is to determine what responsibilities democratic states have toward refugees. This problem is stated within the broader framework of the tension inherent in all democratic states: on the one hand, the sovereign right of a state over its territory and, on the other hand, the cosmopolitan or universal human rights norms upon which the state‟s constitution is founded. I argue that this tension is brought to the fore when refugees cross borders and enter into democratic territories, asking for protection and claiming their human rights. The sheer magnitude of the refugee crisis makes this an issue every state should address. My answer to the question of state responsibility is worked out in four phases. Firstly, I give a conceptual clarification of refugeehood, sovereignty, and cosmopolitanism. I show that neither absolute sovereignty (which implies closed borders) nor extreme cosmopolitanism (which implies no borders) is desirable. Secondly, I draw on Immanuel Kant‟s cosmopolitan theory as a possible solution. Kant proposes a world-federation of states in which right is realised on the civic, international, and cosmopolitan level. Kant also insists that every individual has the right to hospitality – a right which foreign states should recognise. Thirdly, I examine three prominent theories which could offer us a way to address the refugee crisis. I argue that the first two – multiculturalism and John Rawls‟ „law of peoples‟ – are not adequate responses to the refugee crisis, but that the third – Seyla Benhabib‟s cosmopolitan federalism – is more promising. Hospitality is the first responsibility states have toward refugees, and Benhabib proposes that it be institutionalised by (i) forming a federation of states founded on cosmopolitan principles, (ii) revising membership norms through the political process of democratic iterations, and (iii) extending some form of political membership to the state to refugees. Lastly, I justify the claim that political membership should be extended by referring to Hannah Arendt‟s argument that the ability to speak and act publicly is part of what it means to be human. If we deny refugees this ability, or if we deny them access to political processes, we deny their humanity. Benhabib proposes institutional measures to ensure that this does not happen, including allowing for political membership on sub-national, national, and supranational levels. Ultimately, I argue that democratic states have the responsibility to (i) allow entry to refugees, (ii) give refugees legal status and offer protection, and (ii) extend political membership to them on some level. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie tesis is om te bepaal wat die verantwoordelikhede van demokratiese state teenoor vlugtelinge is. Ek plaas hierdie probleem binne die breër raamwerk van die onderliggende spanning in demokratiese state: die soewereine reg van ‟n staat oor sy grondgebied, aan die een kant, en die kosmopolitiese of universele menseregte-norme waarop die staat se grondwet berus, aan die ander kant. Ek argumenteer dat hierdie spanning na vore gebring word wanneer vlugtelinge, op soek na beskerming, grense oorsteek, demokratiese state binnetree en aanspraak maak op hulle regte. Ek bespreek die vraagstuk in vier stappe. Eerstens verduidelik ek die begrippe van vlugtelingskap, soewereiniteit en kosmopolitisme. Ek toon aan dat nóg absolute soewereiniteit (wat geslote grense impliseer), nóg ekstreme kosmopolitisme (wat geen grense impliseer) ‟n wenslike ideaal is. Tweedens kyk ek na Immanuel Kant se kosmopolitiese teorie vir ‟n moontlike oplossing. Kant stel voor dat state saamkom in ‟n wêreld-federasie, om sodoende reg te laat geskied op die plaaslike, internasionale, en kosmopolitiese vlak. Kant dring ook aan daarop dat elke individu die reg tot gasvryheid besit, ‟n reg wat ook deur ander state buiten die individu se staat van herkoms erken behoort te word. Derdens ondersoek ek drie prominente teorieë wat moontlike oplossings bied vir die vlugteling-krisis. Ek argumenteer dat die eerste twee – multikulturalisme en John Rawls se „law of peoples‟ – nie voldoende is om die vlugteling-krisis die hoof te bied nie. Die derde teorie, Seyla Benhabib se kosmopolitiese federalisme, blyk meer belowend te wees. Benhabib stel voor dat die staat se verantwoordelikheid om gasvryheid te toon geïnstitusionaliseer kan word deur (i)‟n federasie van state gegrond op kosmopolitiese beginsels te vorm, (ii) lidmaatskap-norme te hersien deur ‟n politieke proses genaamd demokratiese iterasie, en (iii) politieke lidmaatskap van een of ander aard aan vlugtelinge toe te ken. Laastens regverdig ek die aanspraak op lidmaatskap. Ek verwys na Hannah Arendt se argument dat die vermoë om in die publieke sfeer te praat en dade te kan uitvoer, deel uitmaak van wat dit beteken om ‟n mens te wees. As ons verhoed dat vlugtelinge hierdie twee vermoëns kan uitleef, ontken ons hulle menslikheid. Benhabib stel sekere institutionele maatreëls voor om dit te voorkom. Dit sluit politieke lidmaatskap op ‟n sub-nasionale, nasionale, en supra-nasionale vlak in. Uiteindelik argumenteer ek dat demokratiese state se verantwoordelikhede teenoor vlugtelinge uit die volgende bestaan: (i) toegang tot hierdie state se grondgebied, (ii) wetlike status en beskerming, en (iii) politieke lidmaatskap op een of ander vlak.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / Includes bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: It is a general principle of the law of South Africa that an unassisted contract of a minor is unenforceable against the minor. Although it binds the other party, the minor is not bound. The minor will only be bound if the contract is enforced by his guardian, or if the contract is ratified by the child after attaining majority. This implies that the other party is in a rather unfortunate position, since the effectiveness of the contract will remain uncertain until the guardian of the minor decides to enforce or repudiate the contract, or until the minor ratifies it after attaining majority. The other party may not resile from the contract during this interim period. Should it be established that the contract has failed, the question arises to what extent the parties are obliged to return performances made in purported fulfilment of the contract. In terms of the law of South Africa, the prevailing view is that these claims are based on unjustified enrichment. However, the extent of these claims differs. In principle, both parties’ liability will be limited to the amount remaining in its estate, according to the defence of loss of enrichment. But the application of the defence is subject to an exception that does not apply equally to the parties. Had the other party known or should the other party have known that the enrichment was sine causa, yet continued to part with it, he will be held liable for the full enrichment. However, this exception does not apply to the enrichment liability of minors. In other words, whether the minor knew or should have known that the enrichment was sine causa, he would still be allowed to raise the defence of loss of enrichment. Furthermore, the rules applicable to minors’ enrichment liability applies to all minors, and no scope is left to consider the specific circumstances of each minor. It is accepted that there are two competing principles relating to minors’ unassisted contracts. On the one hand, the law must protect the minor from his immaturity and lack of experience. On the other hand, the law must protect the interests of the other party. It will be seen throughout this study that the determination of how to balance these competing principles is not an easy task. The key aim of this thesis is to investigate the principles governing the unwinding of unassisted minors’ contracts in South Africa. A comparison will be made with the principles applied in other legal systems, in order to identify similarities and differences in the approaches and, to establish what underlies the differences in the various approaches. Germany, England and Scotland have been chosen for comparison for various reasons. First, they share some historical roots, and they represent three major legal traditions, namely the civil law, common law and mixed legal systems, of which South Africa also forms part. Secondly, both England and Scotland have experienced recent legislative reform in this regard, which implies that their respective legal systems should be in line with modern tendencies, and consequently they may provide a valuable framework for possible reform in South Africa. In Germany, although mainly regulated by rather older legislation, there have been interesting developments in the determination of consequences of failed contracts. Hellwege has argued that the unwinding of all contracts should be treated similarly, regardless of the unwinding factor. He has also suggested that in order to prevent the accumulation of risk on one party, and to ensure that the risk is placed on the person who is in control of the object, the defence of loss of enrichment should not be available to any party. His reasoning and suggestions is dealt with in more detail in this thesis. This study argues that the current strict approach applied under South African law regarding minors’ unassisted contracts needs to be re-considered. The current approach is dated and is not in line with modern tendencies and legislation. No proper consideration is given to minors’ development into adulthood or personal circumstances of the parties. It is submitted that in the process of re-consideration, some form of acknowledgement must be given to minors’ development towards mature adults. It is submitted that this would be possible by introducing a more flexible approach to regulate the enforceability and unwinding of minors’ unassisted contracts. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING Dit is ‘n algemene beginsel van die Suid-Afrikaanse reg dat ‘n kontrak aangegaan deur ‘n minderjarige sonder die nodige bystand van sy ouer of voog onafdwingbaar is teenoor die minderjarige. Die minderjarige sal slegs gebonde wees indien die kontrak afgedwing word deur sy voog, of indien die minderjarige self die kontrak ratifiseer nadat hy meerderjarig word. Dit impliseer dat die ander party in ‘n ongunstige posisie is, aangesien die werking van die kontrak onseker is totdat die voog besluit om die kontrak af te dwing of te repudieer, of totdat die minderjarige dit ratifiseer nadat hy meerderjarig word. Gedurende hierdie interim periode mag die ander party nie terugtree uit hierdie kontrak nie. Sou dit bepaal word dat die kontrak misluk het, ontstaan die vraag tot watter mate die partye verplig word om prestasies wat reeds gemaak is, terug te gee. In terme van die Suid-Afrikaanse reg is die meerderheidsopinie dat hierdie eise gebaseer is op onregverdige verryking, maar die omvang van die partye se eise verskil. In beginsel is beide partye se aanspreeklikheid beperk tot die bedrag wat steeds in sy boedel beskikbaar is, weens die beskikbaarheid van die verweer van verlies van verryking. Maar die toepassing van die verweer is onderworpe aan ‘n uitsondering wat nie op beide partye geld nie. Indien die ander party geweet het of moes geweet het dat die verryking sine causa was, maar steeds afstand gedoen het van die verryking, sal hy aanspreeklik gehou word vir die volle verryking. Hierdie reel is egter nie van toepassing op die minderjarige se verrykingsaanspreeklikheid nie. Met ander woorde, indien die minderjarige geweet het of moes geweet het dat die verryking sine causa was, en steeds afstand gedoen het van die verryking, sal hy steeds die verweer van verlies van verryking kan opper. Bowendien, die reels van toepassing op minderjariges se verrykingsaanspreeklikheid is van toepassing op alle minderjariges, en geen ruimte word gelaat om die spesifieke omstandighede van elke minderjarige in ag te neem nie. Wanneer ons kontrakte aangegaan deur minderjariges sonder die nodige bystand, oorweeg, word dit algemeen aanvaar dat daar twee kompeterende beginsels van belang is. Aan die een kant moet die reg die minderjarige beskerm teen sy onvolwassenheid en gebrek aan ondervinding. Aan die ander kant moet die reg ook die belange van die ander party beskerm. Dit sal deurlopend in hierdie studie gesien word dat die behoorlike balansering van hierdie twee beginsels nie ‘n maklike taak is nie. Die hoofdoel van hierdie tesis is om die beginsels wat die afdwingbaarheid en ontbinding van minderjariges se kontrakte in Suid-Afrika, wat aangegaan is sonder die nodige bystand van ‘n voog, te ondersoek. ‘n Vergelyking sal getref word met die beginsels wat in ander regstelsels toegepas word, om sodoende die ooreenkomste en verskille te identifiseer, asook om te bepaal wat hierdie verskille onderlê. Duitsland, Engeland en Skotland is gekies as vergelykende jurisdiksies vir verskeie redes, naamlik hulle historiese gebondenheid en die feit dat hulle drie groot regstradisies (die kontinentale regstelsel, die gemenereg en die gemengde regstelsel) verteenwoordig. Bowendien het beide Engeland en Skotland onlangse wetgewende hervorming ondergaan in hierdie sfeer van die reg, wat impliseer dat hierdie regstelsels waarskynlik in lyn sal wees met moderne tendense. Gevolglik kan hulle ‘n waardevolle raamwerk skep waarbinne moontlike hervorming in Suid-Afrika mag plaasvind. Alhoewel Duitsland grotendeels nog deur ouer wetgewing gereguleer word, het dit ook ‘n reeks interessante verwikkelinge ondergaan in die bepaling van die gevolge van kontrakte wat misluk het. Hellwege argumenteer dat die ontbinding van alle kontrakte dieselfde hanteer moet word, ongeag die onderliggende ontbindende faktor. Hy stel ook voor dat om te verhoed dat die risiko op slegs een party geplaas word, en om te verseker dat dit eerder gedra word deur daardie party wat beheer het oor die voorwerp, die verweer van verlies van verryking nie vir enige party beskikbaar moet wees nie. Sy redenering en voorstelle word in meer besonderhede in hierdie studie bespreek. Hierdie studie argumenteer dat die huidige streng benadering wat in Suid-Afrika toegepas word met betrekking tot kontrakte aangegaan deur minderjariges sonder die nodige bystand van ‘n voog, heroorweeg moet word. Die huidige benadering is verouderd en is nie lyn met moderne tendense en wetgewing nie. Bowendien word geen behoorlike oorweging gegee aan minderjariges se ontwikkeling tot volwassenheid nie, en die partye se persoonlike omstandighede word ook nie in ag geneem nie. Daar word argumenteer dat in die proses van heroorweging, ‘n mate van erkenning gegee moet word aan minderjariges se persoonlike ontwikkeling. Daar word verder argumenteer dat ‘n meer buigsame benadering toegepas moet word ten opsigte van die regulering van die afdwingbaarheid en ontbinding van hierdie kontrakte.

published_or_final_version / Business Administration / Master / Master of Business Administration

published_or_final_version / Chinese Historical Studies / Master / Master of Arts

This study is designed to investigate discrimination in employment against resident aliens in the United States as evaluated by both U.S. practices and standards of international law and to determine whether the American treatment of aliens in employment is compatible with the international standard. In order to examine the common assertion that American practices in the treatment of aliens in employment is superior to the international minimum standard, two sets of hypotheses are tested: one on the existence of the minimum international standard, which protects aliens' rights, and the other on the American practice of requiring citizenship for employment, which deprives aliens of equal protection and thereby places the legal position of aliens below the minimum international standard. Three major sources of data for this study involve data from: (1) international arbitrations, conventions and agreements; (2) United States executive, legislative, and judicial decisions and actions; and (3) Immigration and Naturalization Service materials. The major findings indicate that the contemporary minimum international standard includes post-1945 Human Rights instruments together with the traditional minimum international standards. The most significant finding is that the contemporary minimum standard affords aliens the right to work without discrimination and confirms the relevant hypothesis in connection with the minimum standard. The study reveals that aliens in the United States are discriminated against in employment because of alienage at three different levels--federal, state, and private--with more intensity of discrimination at the federal level, despite the equal protection clause in the U.S. Constitution. The study concludes that American employment practice in the period of 1886-1971 was comparable with the international standard. On the other hand, during the 1971-1980 era, U.S. standards were below the minimum international standard as set forth by international law. This confirms the hypothesis, with some modification, that the U.S. practice of demanding citizenship for some employment has undercut the legal position of aliens so that it falls below the minimum international standard.

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.

No abstract available.

<p>History is regrettably replete with wars and dictatorial regimes that claimed the lives of millions of people. Most of the time the planners were not held accountable for their misdeeds. Fortunately in recent years the idea of people being prosecuted for mass atrocities was launched and debated. The purpose of this study was to propose avenues for promoting respect for victims rights. It examined the rationale of the victims reparation, its evolution, its denial and its rebirth. It canvass victims rights in domestic law especially in the civil law in comparison with international law. It proposed means whereby the international community may better address the issue of victims rights.</p>