Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / Includes bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: South African law does not recognise an inherent right to the existing, unobstructed view from a property. Nevertheless, seemingly in disregard of this general principle, property owners often attempt to protect such views and courts sometimes in fact grant orders that provide such protection. This dissertation aims to establish whether South African law does indeed not acknowledge a right to a view and whether there are any exceptions to the general rule against the recognition of the right to a view. The principle that the existing view from a property is not an inherent property right is rooted in Roman and Roman-Dutch law. This principle was received in early South African case law. Inconsistency in the application of the principle in recent case law renders its development uncertain. An analysis of recent decisions shows that the view from a property is sometimes protected in terms of servitudes or similar devices, or by virtue of legislation. In other instances, property owners attempt to prevent the erection of a neighbouring building that will interfere with their existing views, based either on a substantive right or an administrative shortcoming. When the protection of view is based on a limited real right (servitudes or similar devices) or legislation, it is generally effective and permanent. Conversely, when it is founded on a substantive right to prevent building on neighbouring land or an administrative irregularity rendering a neighbouring building objectionable, the protection is indirect and temporary. A comparative study confirms that the position regarding the protection of view is similar in English and Dutch law. Constitutional analysis in terms of the methodology developed by the Constitutional Court in FNB indicates that cases where view is protected are not in conflict with section 25(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The investigation concludes with an evaluation of policy considerations which show that the position with regard to a right to a view in South African law is rooted in legitimate policy rationales. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: 'n Inherente reg op die bestaande, onbelemmerde uitsig vanaf 'n eiendom word nie deur die Suid-Afrikaanse reg erken nie. Desnieteenstaande poog eienaars dikwels om die uitsig vanaf hul eiendomme te beskerm en soms staan die howe bevele tot dien effekte toe. Dit skep die indruk dat die Suid-Afrikaanse reg wel die bestaande uitsig vanaf 'n eiendom as 'n inherente eiendomsreg erken of dat sodanige uitsig minstens onder sekere omstandighede beskerm kan word. Hierdie verhandeling het ten doel om onsekerhede betreffende die algemene beginsel oor 'n reg op uitsig uit die weg te ruim en om lig te werp op gevalle waar 'n onbelemmerde uitsig wel beskerm word. Die Romeinse en Romeins-Hollandse reg het nie 'n reg op uitsig erken nie. Hierdie posisie is deur vroeë regspraak in die Suid-Afrikaanse regstelsel opgeneem. 'n Ondersoek na latere Suid-Afrikaanse regspraak toon egter aan dat howe wel onder sekere omstandighede, skynbaar strydig met die gemeenregtelike beginsel, beskerming aan die onbelemmerde uitsig vanaf eiendomme verleen. 'n Eerste kategorie sake behels gevalle waar die uitsig vanaf 'n eiendom deur 'n beperkte saaklike reg, in die vorm van 'n serwituut of 'n soortgelyke maatreël, of ingevolge wetgewing beskerm word. In 'n tweede kategorie sake word die beskerming van 'n uitsig deur middel van 'n aanval op die goedkeuring van 'n buureienaar se bouplanne bewerkstellig. Sodanige aanval kan óf op 'n substantiewe reg óf op 'n administratiewe tekortkoming berus. Die onderskeie kategorieë verskil wat betref die doelmatigheid en omvang van die beskerming wat verleen word. 'n Saaklike reg of wetgewing verleen meestal effektiewe en permanente beskerming. Hierteenoor het 'n aanval op die goedkeuring van 'n buureienaar se bouplanne hoogstens indirekte en tydelike beskerming van die uitsig tot gevolg. Regsvergelyking bevestig dat die Engelse en Nederlandse reg die Suid-Afrikaanse posisie ten opsigte van'n reg op uitsig tot 'n groot mate eggo. Grondwetlike analise aan die hand van die FNB-metodologie dui daarop dat die gevalle waar uitsig wel beskerming geniet nie strydig is met artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika, 1996 nie. Bowendien regverdig beleidsgronde die behoud van die huidige beginsel in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg.

A presente dissertação investiga a possibilidade jurídica e as limitações da utilização de meios consensuais para resolução de conflitos que tenham a Administração Pública como parte. Mais especificamente, a dissertação tratará da escolha entre valer-se de meios consensuais para a solução do conflito ou de relegá-lo a um meio adjudicatório, especialmente o processo judicial. No primeiro capítulo, o trabalho situa a adoção dos meios consensuais pela Administração Pública no contexto de desenvolvimento das ADRs no Brasil, com influência da experiência norte-americana. No segundo, trata de revisitar alguns dogmas do Direito Administrativo que possam configurar óbices à adoção dos meios consensuais, como a legalidade estrita e a supremacia do interesse público, bem como situar novamente o tema no contexto de expansão da atuação administrativa consensual. O terceiro capítulo apresenta conceitos importantes para compreender a questão como: interesse público e indisponibilidade; meios adjudicatórios de solução de conflitos; meios consensuais de solução de conflitos (negociação, mediação e conciliação). No quarto capítulo, serão abordadas as limitações que o regime de direito público impõe à adoção de meios consensuais pela Administração Pública. O quinto capítulo traz um contraponto aos meios consensuais, relatando algumas críticas e riscos de sua adoção. Por fim, o sexto capítulo relata pesquisa empírica realizada na Procuradoria-Geral do Município de São Paulo com a finalidade de revelar experiências e óbices práticos à adoção de meios consensuais. / This essay investigates the legal possibility and limitations of the use of consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution by Public Administration as one of the parties. More specifically, the essay addresses the choice between using consensual mechanisms to resolve the dispute or relegate it to adjudication, especially the judicial process. In the first chapter, the essay poses the use of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration in the context of ADRs development in Brazil, influenced by north american experience. In the second chapter, the essay revisits some tenets of Administrative Law that may constitute obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms, such as strict legality and the supremacy of the public interest, and also poses the issue in the context of the expansion of consensual administrative action. The third chapter presents important concepts to understand the issue, such as: public interest and availability; adjudicatory mechanisms of dispute resolution; consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution (negotiation, mediation and conciliation). The fourth chapter adresses the limitations imposed by Public Law to the adoption of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration. The fifth chapter provides a counterpoint to consensual mechanisms, reporting some criticism and risks of its adoption. Finally, the sixth chapter reports empirical research conducted at São Paulo Citys Attorney General Office in order to reveal experiences and practical obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms.

A presente dissertação investiga a possibilidade jurídica e as limitações da utilização de meios consensuais para resolução de conflitos que tenham a Administração Pública como parte. Mais especificamente, a dissertação tratará da escolha entre valer-se de meios consensuais para a solução do conflito ou de relegá-lo a um meio adjudicatório, especialmente o processo judicial. No primeiro capítulo, o trabalho situa a adoção dos meios consensuais pela Administração Pública no contexto de desenvolvimento das ADRs no Brasil, com influência da experiência norte-americana. No segundo, trata de revisitar alguns dogmas do Direito Administrativo que possam configurar óbices à adoção dos meios consensuais, como a legalidade estrita e a supremacia do interesse público, bem como situar novamente o tema no contexto de expansão da atuação administrativa consensual. O terceiro capítulo apresenta conceitos importantes para compreender a questão como: interesse público e indisponibilidade; meios adjudicatórios de solução de conflitos; meios consensuais de solução de conflitos (negociação, mediação e conciliação). No quarto capítulo, serão abordadas as limitações que o regime de direito público impõe à adoção de meios consensuais pela Administração Pública. O quinto capítulo traz um contraponto aos meios consensuais, relatando algumas críticas e riscos de sua adoção. Por fim, o sexto capítulo relata pesquisa empírica realizada na Procuradoria-Geral do Município de São Paulo com a finalidade de revelar experiências e óbices práticos à adoção de meios consensuais. / This essay investigates the legal possibility and limitations of the use of consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution by Public Administration as one of the parties. More specifically, the essay addresses the choice between using consensual mechanisms to resolve the dispute or relegate it to adjudication, especially the judicial process. In the first chapter, the essay poses the use of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration in the context of ADRs development in Brazil, influenced by north american experience. In the second chapter, the essay revisits some tenets of Administrative Law that may constitute obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms, such as strict legality and the supremacy of the public interest, and also poses the issue in the context of the expansion of consensual administrative action. The third chapter presents important concepts to understand the issue, such as: public interest and availability; adjudicatory mechanisms of dispute resolution; consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution (negotiation, mediation and conciliation). The fourth chapter adresses the limitations imposed by Public Law to the adoption of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration. The fifth chapter provides a counterpoint to consensual mechanisms, reporting some criticism and risks of its adoption. Finally, the sixth chapter reports empirical research conducted at São Paulo Citys Attorney General Office in order to reveal experiences and practical obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms.

Esta tese trata da resolução online de controvérsias. Parte-se da hipótese de que sua expansão para múltiplas jurisdições e vários tipos de conflitos, incluindo os complexos e de alto valor, provocará mudanças significativas no direito. São analisados, das perspectivas jurídica e econômica, as condições para a resolução extrajudicial de disputas, por meios alternativos (adequados), inclusive online, com atenção para o design orientado à prevenção e à resolução massificada de conflitos e para o emprego de tecnologias persuasivas com esta finalidade. Examinam-se os desafios conexos a tecnologias de informação e comunicação, os conflitos deles derivados e as instituições e partes envolvidas em sua resolução. Descreve-se o potencial dos mecanismos de resolução online de controvérsias a partir de três estudos de caso eBay, prefeitura de Nova York e Wikipedia. Investigam-se as consequências jurídicas da disseminação de mecanismos de resolução online de controvérsias à luz das experiências públicas e privadas e projetos existentes. Por fim, os impactos destas novas formas de dirimir conflitos são analisados nos planos nacional em relação a devido processo legal, direitos de terceiros e ordem pública e internacional, com destaque para as alternativas que se apresentam a Estados e organizações internacionais. Conclui-se apontando, por um lado, as preocupações relativas ao controle jurisdicional sobre a resolução online de controvérsias; por outro, as promessas desta decorrentes, traduzidas em especial em eficiência e acesso à justiça. / This dissertation discusses online dispute resolution. Its hypothesis is that the expansion of this form of dispute resolution across jurisdictions and towards many types of conflict, including complex and high-value ones, will promote substantive legal changes. The conditions for outof-court dispute resolution are analyzed, from the normative and economic perspectives, covering alternative (adequate) and online dispute resolution, with attention to its design focused on the scalable resolution of controversies and to the use of persuasive technologies to that end. The challenges connected to information and communication technologies, the conflicts deriving from them and the institutions and parties involved in their resolution are examined. The potential for online dispute resolution is described through three case studies eBay, New York City and Wikipedia. The legal consequences of the dissemination of online dispute resolution are studied in light of the existing public and private experiences and projects. Finally, the impacts of these new forms of solving conflicts are analyzed at the national with respect to due process, third party rights and public policy and international levels, highlighting the alternatives available to states and international organizations. The dissertation concludes by noting the concerns related to jurisdictional control over online dispute resolution and the prospects arising out of it, especially prominent in terms of efficiency and access to justice.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Passau, 2006. / "Zivilrecht"--Cover. Includes bibliographical references (p. 275-290).

This thesis examines community engagement as a form of conflict prevention in order to obtain the social license to operate (SLO) in Alberta’s oil and gas industry. It does this by answering the question: what are the key elements of the Social License to Operate and how can these elements be applied to community engagement/consultation in a way that prevents conflicts in Alberta’s oil and gas industry? The underlying assumption of this thesis is that building good relationships and working collaboratively functions as a form of conflict prevention and that this in turn leads to the SLO. This thesis outlines the key features of both successful community engagement and of the SLO, to provide a guideline for what is needed to obtain the SLO. Data was collected from semi-structured interviews and through a literature review. The data analysis concluded that there are direct parallels between the key elements of effective community engagement and the key elements of the SLO as identified in the interviews. These parallels are: knowing the community, addressing community needs, corporate social responsibility, relationship building, follow through and evidence for what has been done, executive buy-in, excellent communication, and open dialogue, all within a process which is principled (there is trust, understanding, transparency and respect), inclusive, dynamic, flexible, ongoing, and long-term. Moreover, the key elements of effective community engagement and of the SLO identified in the interviews also overlapped with those found in the literature review, with only one exception. The literature review explicitly named early involvement as a key element of both effective community engagement and the SLO, whereas the interview participants only explicitly indicated it as a key factor of community engagement and implied it to be a key element of the SLO. / Graduate

This diploma thesis seeks to characterize and critically evaluate current development in the field of Online Dispute Resolution. In particular, interpreting international legislation focusing on present development and trends in this alternative dispute resolution, with help of Information and Communication Technologies. This thesis is divided into a total of seven chapters, which four of them are considered essential. The first is the second chapter, where the author of the thesis deals with the legislation of the Online Dispute Resolution in the Czech Republic. Secondly, the third chapter provides an explanation related to the domain disputes in the Czech Republic, the EU and the rest of the world. The fourth chapter deals with the development of legislative initiatives at the European Union level. Of particular note being, the European Union Regulation No. 524/2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes. Further to that, chapter 5 deals with the activities of the The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law conducted by the third working group. In conclusion, the author notes that the main goal of the diploma thesis, namely the provision of an overview of the legislation of the Online Dispute Resolution, developing possibility of alternative dispute resolution, has been achieved.

The thesis examines the Namibian labour dispute resolution system by undertaking a comparative analysis of South African and international labour standards. It describes the legal provisions that exist for the effective and efficient resolution of labour disputes through an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) system, which is given recognition in national labour legislation, and in a number of international labour standards and regional labour instruments. It argues for the provision of a proactive and expeditious dispute resolution system that helps to resolve labour disputes in the most effective and efficient manner, without necessarily having to resort to the courts. The study examines the provisions of relevant international labour standards on labour dispute resolution to ascertain their adequacy as part frameworks that apply to Namibia and South Africa’s obligation to provide ADR systems that respond to the needs of the labour relations community. It is argued that ratifying particular ILO conventions creates obligations to comply with their provisions, and to apply them in national legislation and in practice. It is further argued that by having ratified those international labour standards that provide for ADR, Namibia assumes specific obligations under international law, enjoining the country to provide the required ADR system of conciliation and arbitration, which is credible and trusted by disputants and the general public. A comparative approach is adopted, which relies on primary and secondary sources of data, thereby undertaking an in-depth content analysis. The focus of the comparison is on whether the South African ADR system can inform Namibia’s application of its newly adopted ADR system. South Africa has a labour dispute resolution system that has influenced Namibian labour law, prompting Namibia to borrow its ADR system from South Africa’s advanced Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). In this sense, it is submitted that there are fundamental similarities and differences in the two respective systems. Ideally, disputes should be resolved at conciliation level, resulting in the minority of disputes being referred to arbitration or the Labour Court. In terms of implementation, it is argued that despite the international obligation and commitment to provide and make available free and expeditious ADR services, there are gaps that exist between the legal framework regulating the ADR system and the application thereof in practice, making the attainment of effective and efficient labour dispute resolution difficult. Disputes should be resolved as quickly and informally as possible, with little or no procedural technicalities, and without allowing them to drag on indefinitely, offering immediate solutions instead. This is far from the reality of the situation. In contrast, the study found that although the Labour Act, 2007 and the South African Labour Relations Act (LRA) have brought statutory dispute resolution within the reach of the ordinary worker, these Acts may have compounded the problems relating to dispute resolution in the respective countries. The statutes in question have created sophisticated systems of dispute resolution in which most role players are seen as failing to operate as a result of the complex and technical processes of dealing with disputes. For this reason, the author proposes several remedial interventions that look to the future and the continued provision of fast, effective and user-friendly ADR services. Solving these problems and making effective and efficient labour dispute resolution a reality calls for renewed commitment from government and social partners and investment in appropriate human and financial resources. This requires a strong political will as well as concerted efforts from all role players in the labour relations community in the two respective countries.

Thesis (LLM. (Labour Laws)) -- University of Limpopo, 2022 / This dissertation presents a legal analysis of the effectiveness of arbitration process in unfair dismissal dispute with a particular emphasis on South Africa. The use of arbitration process in resolving unfair dismissal dispute is influenced by its efficiency, accessibility and flexibility. In South Africa, arbitration process is employed by the CCMA that was established to encourage effective labour dispute. A central problem that the CCMA encounter which affects its effectiveness is the high number of unfair dismissal disputes referred for arbitration process. According to the legal research offered in this dissertation, the number of unjust dismissal disputes brought to arbitration process continue to rise every year. As a result, the CCMA is swamped by these referrals, which affects its effectiveness. According to the findings, the arbitration process is now widely used around the world to resolve unfair dismissal disputes. The extent to which the arbitration process is adopted to resolve unfair dismissal dispute varies from country to country and is guided by legislation. As a result, it has been discovered that the CCMA may benefit from the ACAS’s arbitration process strengths from the United Kingdom as well as Namibia’s arbitration process strengths. The United Kingdom results show that ACAS is able to resolve a higher proportion of unfair dismissal dispute through conciliation rather than arbitration, which reduces the number of referrals from the arbitration process. In Namibia, if parties to unfair dismissal dispute want to refer an unfair dismissal dispute for arbitration process it must be done by mutual agreement between the parties except in exceptional circumstances. All this mode of operation between United Kingdom and Namibia when resolving unfair dismissal disputes hinder high referral rate from the arbitration process. This dissertation concludes with recommendations arising from policy making that promotes the effectiveness of the arbitration process and limiting the abuse of the process.

The system of Alternative Dispute Resolution, commonly known as ADR, comprises multiple informal processes. Traditional processes of negotiation, mediation and arbitration are primary processes within the system of ADR. The elements of the primary processes have been combined with one another or with those of public process to form hybrid ADR processes original only to the system of ADR. These hybrid processes are: rent-a-judge, the mini-trial, the summary jury trial, neutral evaluation and mediation/arbitration. Under the auspices of ADR, derivative processes have also been developed, such as expedited arbitration, documents-only arbitration, final-offer arbitration and quality arbitration. Each process is distinct and separate, having its own unique form, function and method of transforming a dispute. Outwardly, this represents a diverse collection of disjunctive processes. Yet an introspective analysis shows that there is an innate centrality that originates in core principles that bind individual processes to each other and to a unified body of theory. These foundational principles of ADR are replicated in each of its processes. In these terms, ADR is therefore conceptualised as a pluralistic system of dispute resolution that consists of autonomous and individual systems of process that conform to a central body of general theory and consensual principles. As a method of extracting the fundamental principles of ADR, the discontinuities and continuities between the theory and principles of civil procedure, as a unitary system .of procedure, and ADR processes are explored. However, in its conclusions, the thesis rejects the premises of a unitary system of procedure as forming the basis for the theory and principles of ADR. Instead, the contrary notion is advanced that ADR is an independent system of dispute resolution which is based on a theory of processual pluralism and supported by cogent processual principles. / Constitutional, International & Indigenous Law / LL.D.