In this investigation, a review is undertaken of the newly promulgated and existent legislation pertaining to the conservation of biodiversity, and the establishment of protected areas as the primary means to protect representative samples thereof. This review develops understanding of the various types of protected areas which may be used, in a broad sense, to conserve the country's biodiversity, with special reference being made to the recently promulgated Protected Areas Act. In undertaking this, a detailed discussion of biodiversity, trusteeship and the concept of systematic planning and irreplaceability is generated. Cursory comment and discussion in a socio-political context, in particular regarding land reform, as well as the various international obligations and commitments the country has undertaken, is made. Despite South Africa being the third most biologically diverse country globally, it is concluded that the conservation of its biodiversity has had a troubled and undirected history. The establishment of protected areas, as a result, has been ad hoc and potentially ineffective at a national scale. The source of this observation is linked directly to the absence of a structured and co-ordinated framework that supports the fulfilment of the country's international commitments to conserve biodiversity. The promulgation of the Biodiversity Act and subsequently the Protected Areas Act, has brought into playa significant step forward in developing this co-ordinated framework. The Act clarifies and brings effect to the State's trusteeship as well as providing a platform for the participation of a wider range of role players, especially previously disadvantaged and land dispossessed communities, in conservation and protection of biodiversity. This participation includes conserving biodiversity for economic, social, and cultural reasons. The absence of meaningful incentives for private and communal landowners to voluntarily conserve biodiversity, and the significance ofthis, is also discussed. Finally a consideration is given of the secondary aim of this legislation, to simplify the statutes concerning the conservation of biodiversity and particularly those pertaining to protected area establishment. This simplification is only partially achieved as a number of protected areas are still not at all or partially regulated by the Protected Areas Act. This may be a source of confusion and uncertainty. / Thesis (LL.M.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2005.

Conservation agreements have been used successfully around the globe for the conservation of biodiversity on private land. In South Africa however, their use to this end has largely been overlooked. Conservation mechanisms in the country have focussed primarily on traditional methods; establishing and managing protected areas identified as having some form of conservation significance. At present only 5.8% of land in South Africa is conserved in statutory protected areas, however government has committed itself to increasing this percentage to 8%. Furthermore, many of the country's biodiversity-rich areas are situated on private land and are currently afforded little or no protection. The cost of purchasing the land is not only financially prohibitive but also socially unacceptable and consequently alternative conservations mechanisms need to be explored. This study provides a comparative analysis of the legislation governing conservation agreements in the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and highlights several common key provisions which have contributed to the success of these agreements. It also provides recommendations on possible changes to the South African legislation to allow for a more effective contribution by private landowners to biodiversity objectives and targets within the country. Although the study establishes that conservation agreements can be accommodated within South Africa's legal system it acknowledges that the success of these agreements is largely dependent on complex interactions between effective policy, supporting institutional arrangements, and attractive incentives. It cautions that if these agreements are to work in South Africa, then careful consideration needs to be given not only to tailor-making the legislation to the South African environment but also to establishing incentives which facilitate "buy-in" from landowners. / Thesis (LL.M.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2008.

The growth of industrialization has increased waste pollution, especially water pollution. Industries and individuals produce pollutants that are discharged into waters. Uncontrolled water pollution results in health hazards to human beings, animals and other living things. Thus there is a need to impose water pollution control measures which can reduce pollution to an extent where very little pollutants are discharged into waters. Many states have enacted statutes for controlling water pollution, as they believe this is the best way to impose measures to achieve the safety of waters. Legislations impose measures, such as a permit and its conditions, that must be respected to discharge pollutant or trade effluent into waters, otherwise the discharger becomes a polluter and liable to criminal sanctions. Statutes create offences and penalties for water polluters. They provide fines or imprisonment, or both, and severely punish a subsequent offender. In most countries, a continuing offence is criminalised. Corporations, as well as corporate officers, are punished for the offence of polluting waters or other environmental crimes. This is because environmental law does not allow corporate officers to hide behind the legal structure of the corporation. Some measures such as remediation or clean-up orders are implemented before a prosecution is engaged, in order to ensure the protection of the environment. Environmental audit or service orders emphasise the protection of the environment and may prevent future pollution of waters. Environmental service orders rectify one of the criticisms of fine or imprisonment, in that they fail to restore the environment to its previous condition. Most environmental crimes are caused not by a deliberate intention or negligence, but by poor or ineffective management systems. As a result, environmental audit orders may be used to detect and correct an inappropriate management system. Environmental law should be a user-friendly and prosecution must be used as a last resort. This dissertation examines offences and penalties for water pollution in South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Australia and offers a comparative analysis and recommendations for South Africa. These countries have been selected not only because they are developed and tend to have best laws, but they are also located in different continents. The examination and analysis of how they provide offences and penalties for water pollution gives a chance to South Africa to find recommendations on how it may improve its legislation and maintain its water quality. / Thesis (LL.M)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2008

South Africa's re-integration into the global trading economy and its participation in various trade agreements has resulted in an increase in the number of import and export transactions processed by the South African Revenue Services Customs Division. Importers and Exporters are expanding into new markets and regions, which require them to adhere to the legislative administrative requirements, enforced at the various designated Customs branch offices. To achieve Customs compliance, it is necessary that importers and exporters make the correct declaration to the SARS and make available the appropriate documentary information to support import and export transactions. Also, increasing pressure from other government authority and government agencies makes it a prerequisite that any goods cleared for either import and export is properly declared taking cognisance of all Acts enforced by the SARS Customs Division. This research dissertation is aimed at identifying the key factors that impact the SARS Accreditation Scheme / Program to both legitimate and illegitimate traders, it evaluates the benefits of the Accreditation program and determines what actions that are required by the SARS and traders to improve the levels of client service and Customs enforcement by the SARS Customs Division. Based on the analysis, the discrepancy between the current service expectation of the SARS Accreditation Scheme and service delivery by the SARS Customs Division urgently needs to be reviewed in light of Customs enforcement and Customs trade facilitation practices. / Thesis (MBA)-University of Natal, 2003.

The Public Service is service delivery driven, and is dependent on the quality, skill and performance of the employees to carry through its business. It is therefore imperative that the policies and systems pertaining to human capital are effectively and efficiently managed. The Basic Conditions of Employment Act regulates the basic conditions of employment and states that employees’ may be absent from duty due to illness. The public sector uses the Determination on the Leave of Absence in the Public Service as a tool to regulate leave in the public sector. The Determination provides employees with 36 paid sick days to be utilised by an employee within a three-year cycle. In cases where an employee has exhausted the sick leave, the employer may grant Temporary Incapacity Leave, which is discretional. The Public Service Commission has a constitutional obligation to monitor the performance of the public sector and produce reports covering the human resources management practices. With regards to the management of leave in the public sector, the reports reveal the abuse of sick leave by employees, non-compliance and the in-effective management. The Department of Public Service and Administration then developed the PILIR as a guide to manage and administer sick and incapacity leave in the public sector. This treatise therefore, discusses the regulation of sick and incapacity leave in the public sector and investigates the extent to which the applicable legislative framework is effective. The discussion uses the Labour Court judgment in the matter between The Public Service Association & Others versus the PSCBC & Others as reference, and further evaluates the judicial jurisprudence to demonstrate the extent of contentions of the private sector employers by the employees. Furthermore, this treatise seeks to evaluate the extent of similarities or differences of the practices both the private sector and the municipalities. In conclusion, the treatise makes recommendations on the best practices that can be adopted by the public sector to turn the situation around.

The recent amendments made to employment laws and in particular the rewriting of the South African Labour Relations Act has brought into focus the diverse and conflicting interests of employers and employees, which is a concern of labour law analysts. This appraisal of South African of strike law examines the statutory and judicially established labour law in regard to the phenomenon of collective industrial action by employees and the regulation of its occurrence. Historical developments in strike law are traced from the early 1900’s. A period of segregated trade unionism, led ultimately to the introduction of a more inclusive system of regulation, which has in turn been modified to bring the law into line with the new constitutional imperatives. Industrial action occurred, often unregulated and regardless of statutory limitations, and in particular that industrial action which related to mass protest action, now recognized as a specific form of strike. The now repealed Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956 is examined with regard to its strike regulating provisions, and identification of what were then new, unrecognized forms of strike action. It has allowed concepts and principles to be developed, under the unfair labour practice jurisdiction of the Industrial Court, much of which has been incorporated in the new Labour Relations Act. The legislation on strike law, which has been developed over the years, has been refined by the constitutional imperatives introduced to the national legal system. The relevant aspects of the new Constitution Act 108 of 1996 and its pervasive effect on strike law are examined. The right to strike in South African labour law, together with the protection of collective bargaining, is now constitutionally entrenched, and the right to strike is now accepted as a necessary adjunct to collective bargaining. It is necessary to give effect to the Constitution in national legislation, and the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 endeavours to accomplish this in chapter IV in regard to strike law, which, it could be argued, limits rather than gives expression to the right to strike. iii The Labour Relations Act of 1995 is then discussed with reference to protected and prohibited strikes, and unregulated strike action. It will be evident that the Act has endeavoured to contain unprocedural and productivity draining industrial action, by subjecting rights disputes to arbitration and Labour Court adjudication, subject to certain exceptions. The recourse to lock-out, as the employer’s prerogative and general corollary of strike action, is briefly discussed. The case law relating to strikes is discussed in respect of both the 1956 Act and the new Labour Relations Act of 1995. Among the issues explored are the strike provisions which have been developed in statute and labour related common law, such as the identification of issues in dispute, notice of strike, the issuing of ultimatums, the audi altarem partem rule and the court’s approach to protected and unprotected strikes. The intention is to determine trends resulting from amendments to the law and draw inferences regarding, in particular, the unregulated form of strikes that occur within the scope of the protections offered by the Act. It is the intention to determine whether the desired effect has been achieved by implementing legislative reforms in response to public policy considerations.

The lock-out is accepted as a necessary element of collective bargaining. The law relating to lock-out is considered as a legitimate instrument of industrial action. There are a number of procedural requirements for a legal lock-out. The dispute should be referred to a bargaining council (or where there is no bargaining council with jurisdiction, to a statutory council) or, failing which, the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration. If the bargaining/statutory council or the commission fails to resolve the dispute, it is no longer required that a ballet should be brought out in favour of the contemplated lock-out before the lock-out could be legal: all that is required is that the period of notice of the intended lock-out is given. The lock-out may either be protected or unprotected. It is protected if it is not prohibited absolutely and the various procedural requirements have been complied with. The protected lock-out is immuned from civil liability. On the other hand a lockout will be unprotected if it does not comply with sections 64 and 65 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995. In the circumstances the Labour Court has exclusive jurisdiction to grant an interdict or order to restrain any person from participating in unprotected industrial action and to order the payment of just and equitable compensation for any loss attributable to the lock-out. Lock-outs are prohibited in specific instances and allowed with some qualifications in others. For example, employers engaged in the provision of essential or maintenance services are prohibited from locking their employees out in order compel them to comply with their demand. Such essential services are Parliamentary services, the South African Police Service and a service the interruption of which endangers the life, personal safety or health of the whole. A distinction is also drawn between offensive and defensive lock-outs. Defensive lock-outs involve the closure of an employer’s premises or the shutting down of its operations during industrial action initiated by workers. The offensive lock-outs, also known as “pre-emptive lock-outs”, amount to an employer initiated form of industrial iv action where the premises are locked and workers are excluded and prevented from working. The law relating to lock-out in South Africa is clearly put in its proper perspective by the interim Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 200 of 1993, final Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 108 of 1996, Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 and in Ex Parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.1 However the situation is unsatisfactory to employers. The interim Constitution guaranteed the “right to strike” and “recourse to the lock-out”. Under the final Constitution lock-outs enjoy no direct protection. The Constitutional Court’s certification judgement rejects the view that it is necessary in order to maintain equality to entrench the right to lock-out once the right to strike has been included. The Constitutional Court concluded that the right to strike and the right to lock-out are not always and necessarily equivalent. However the purpose of the lock-out is to settle collective dispute of the ways permitted by the Labour Relations Act, 1995. The purpose is not to terminate the relationship between the employer and the employee. The employer may not, for example, dismiss employees finally at the end of an unsuccessful lock-out in order to avoid the consequences of impending strike action by the employees.

Labour law in South Africa has evolved over the past century at an ever increasing pace. The establishment of a democratic government in 1995 has been the trigger for a large number of labour law statutes being promulgated, particularly with reference to the laws governing the employment relationship and dismissal. From very humble and employer biased dispute resolution application under the common law of contract, labour law in this country has evolved through the various acts culminating in a labour law system which is highly regulated and codified. Dismissal for medical incapacity in this treatise is reviewed with regard to the applicable statutes and the various codes of good practice as the law has evolved and developed from the period covered by the common law through that covered by the 1995 LRA up to and including the current period. Particular attention is paid to both substantive and procedural requirements as well as the remedies applicable under the different legal regimes and the pertinent tribunals and courts. Regard is also given to the duration and causes of incapacity and the effect this may have on the applicable remedy applied by these tribunals. It will become apparant that the medically incapacitated employee occupied a relatively weak and vulnerable position under the common law as opposed to the current position under the 1995 LRA. The influence of the remedies applied by the tribunals under the 1956 LRA are clearly evident in the current regulations and codes under the 1995 LRA which contain specific statutory provisions for employees not to be unfairly dismissed. Distinctions are drawn between permissible and impermissible dismissals, with medical incapacity falling under the former. v Furthermore, a distinction is drawn statutorily between permanent and temporary illhealth/ injury incapacity with detailed guidelines for substantive and procedural fairness requirements to be met by employers. The powers of the specialist tribunals (CCMA, Bargaining Councils and Labour Courts) are regulated by statutory provisions and deal with appropriate remedies (reinstatement and/or compensation) a wardable in appropriate circumstances. Certain specific areas nonetheless still remain problematic for these tribunals and hence questions that require clear direction from the drafters of our law are: 1. How to distinguish misconduct in alcohol and drug abuse cases? 2. What degree of intermittent absenteeism is required before dismissal would be warranted? In certain other areas the tribunals have been fairly consistent and prescriptive in their approach and remedies awarded. Included here would be permanent incapacity, HIV cases and misconduct. It will emerge, however, that under the 1995 LRA the position of employees and the protections afforded them have been greatly increased.

The history of constructive dismissals in South Africa imitated from the English law in 1986, when an employee successfully challenged the employer on this particular concept after an incident relating a forced resignation. From the literature it is clear that constructive dismissal, as we know it today, originated from our English counterparts. Being a relatively new concept, the South African labour laws caught on at a rapid pace. The leading case on which the South African authors leaned towards was the English case of Woods v WM Car Services (Peterborough). In South Africa constructive dismissals were given statutory force in unfair dismissal law and is defined as the coerced or forced termination of a contract of employment resultant in from the conduct of the employer. There are many forms in which constructive dismissals would postulate that could justify an employee to lay claim to constructive dismissal. Examples thereof are the amendment of the contract of employment, rude language and sexual harassment. It is eminent that certain elements should be present before an employee would have reasonable prospects of succeeding with such a claim. Constructive dismissal comes into the equation when an employer behaves in such a manner that eventually and ultimately leads to the employee, being the receiving party, in the employment relationship, to terminate the employment contract. This termination must be the direct result of the conduct of the employer that irreparably frustrated the relationship and made it impossible for the employee to remain in the service of the employer in question. It appears that the courts have taken a firm stance on coerced or forced resignation, in its various forms tantamount to breach of contact, that any sufficiently unreasonable conduct by an employer may justify that the employee to terminate services and lay claim to the fact that he had been constructively dismissed. It needs to be mentioned that the fact that the mere fact that the employer acted in an unreasonable manner would not suffice and it is up to the employee to prove how the conduct of the employer justified the employee to leave and claim that the employer’s conduct resulted in a material or fundamental beach of the employment contract. In dealing with the contingency of the concept of constructive dismissals it has been expressly provided for in numerous systems of labour law. As is seen herein, a constructive dismissal consists in the termination of the employment contract by reason of the employee’s rather than the employer’s own immediate act. The act of the employee is precipitated by earlier conduct on the part of the employer, which conduct may or may not be justified. Various authors and academics endeavoured to defined constructive dismissal and all had the same or at least some of the elements present, to justify constructive dismissal. The most glaring element being the termination of employment as a result of the any conduct that is tantamount to a breach going to the root of the relationship by the employer, that frustrated the relationship between the employer and the employee and rendered it irreparable. The employee resigns or repudiates the employment contract as a result of the employer normally not leaving the employee any other option but to resign. This can also be termed as coerced or forced resignations and are commonly better known as “constructive dismissal”. The employee is deemed to have been dismissed, even though it is the employee who terminated the employment contract. The most important element to mention is the employee terminated the employment contract, ie resigned yet this is regarded as a dismissal, it is however for the employee to first lay a claim at the proper authority and the employee must prove his / her allegation before it can be a constructive dismissal. As will become clear, that the onus of proof is on the employee to show that the termination of employment resulted from the conduct of the employer. Equally true as in all cases of constructive dismissal, including cases of sexual harassment, being a ground for constructive dismissal, the employee must prove that to remain in service would have been unbearable and intolerable. Sexual harassment is one of the most difficult forms of constructive dismissals, in many cases there are no witnesses and the employee either “suffers in silence or opt to place her dignity at stake to prove her case. It seems as though the test is to determine if the employer’s conduct evinced a deliberate and oppressive intention to have the employment terminated and left the employee with only one option that of resignation to protect her interests. Employees have a right to seek statutory relief and needs to be protected. If a coerced or forced resignation had taken place irrespective whether the employee resigned or not. It is against this back drop that constructive dismissals was given legality and are now recognized as one of the four forms of dismissals in terms of the Act.

Africa as no exception. It is generally accepted that women constitute the vast majority of sexual harassment victims. Sexual harassment is therefore one of the major barriers to women’s equality as it is a significant obstacle to women’s entrance into many sectors of the labour market. The Constitution now provides that no person may unfairly discriminate against anyone on grounds of, inter alia, sex and gender. The Employment Equity Act now provides that harassment is a form of unfair discrimination. It has been said that harassment is discriminatory because it raises an arbitrary barrier to the full and equal enjoyment of a person’s rights in the workplace. Much can be learned from the law of the United States and that country’s struggle to fit harassment under its discrimination laws. The Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment Cases attempts to eliminate sexual harassment in the workplace by providing procedures that will enable employers to deal with occurrences of sexual harassment and to implement preventative measures. The Code also encourages employers to develop and implement policies on sexual harassment that will serve as a guideline for the conduct of all employees. Although the Code has been subject to some criticism, particularly regarding the test for sexual harassment, it remains a valuable guide to both employers and employees alike. The appropriate test for sexual harassment as a form of unfair discrimination has given rise to debate. Both the subjective test and the objective test for sexual harassment present problems. Some authors recommend a compromise between these two tests in the form of the “reasonable victim” test. The Employment Equity Act makes the employer liable for the prohibited acts of the employee in certain circumstances. The Act, however, places certain responsibilities on the employer and the employee-victim before the employer will be held liable for sexual harassment committed by an employee. Sexual harassment committed by an employee constitutes misconduct and can be a dismissible offence. An employer may also be held to have constructively dismissed an employee, if the employer was aware of the sexual harassment and failed to control such behaviour, and the employee is forced to resign. The test for determining the appropriateness of the sanction of dismissal for sexual harassment is whether or not the employee’s misconduct is serious and of such gravity that it makes a continued employment relationship intolerable. However, for such a dismissal to be fair it must be both substantively fair and procedurally fair.