Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2005. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In 2002 the South African Law Commission published a report in which amendments to the existing rules of criminal procedure and evidence were proposed. A number of these recommendations have since been included in a Bill that was tabled before Parliament in 2003. The proposed amendments largely reflect values which underlie the "Victims' Rights" movement. The aim of this thesis is to consider the possible influence of these amendments on the constitutionally guaranteed fair trial rights of the accused. The study focuses on those amendments that play a role in the prosecution of alleged sexual offences against children, and shows that although the recognition of victims' rights is important, it should not be done at the expense of a fair trial. Dangers inherent to the proposed amendments are therefore highlighted. The rights of the accused are used to test the desirability or not of the proposed amendments. Foreign authority is used to support the argument made in the thesis. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In 2002 het die Suid-Afrikaanse Regskommissie 'n verslag gepubliseer waann veranderings aan die huidige strafprosesreg- en bewysregreëls voorgestel word. 'n Aantal van hierdie voorgestelde wysigings is intussen opgeneem in 'n Wetsontwerp wat in Augustus 2003 voor die Parlement gedien het. Die voorgestelde wysigings reflekteer tot 'n groot mate waardes wat die "Victims' rights" beweging onderlê. Die doel van hierdie tesis is om die moontlike invloed van hierdie wysigings op die grondwetlik verskanste billike verhoor regte van die beskuldigde te ondersoek. Die ondersoek fokus op daardie veranderinge wat 'n rol speel in die vervolging van beweerde geslagsmisdade teen kinders. Daar word aangetoon dat alhoewel die erkenning van regte vir slagoffers belangrik is, dit nie ten koste van 'n regverdige verhoor gedoen kan word nie. Gevare verbonde aan die voorgestelde wysigings word dus uitgewys. Die regte van die beskuldigde word deurgaans gebruik om die wenslikheid al dan nie van die voorgestelde wysigings aan te toon. Buitelandse gesag word aangewend om die betoog te ondersteun.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2004 / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis deals with the criminal liability of Internet providers. The focus is on Germany, but the analysis is put in a wider, comparative context. This is done with reference to South Africa, as well as Europe and the American system. This thesis demonstrates and discusses the existing legal norms to regulate Internet provider liability for illegal content on the Internet and the international efforts to deal with this issue. In the introduction it is shown how the Internet has given rise to a new form of global communication and the accompanying legal problems. This is followed by an examination of the different functions Internet providers have. A survey of some of the important crimes affecting the Internet and also some Internet-specific offences put the more general issue of liability in a more specific context. Traditional and new forms of crimes are discussed. This section is followed by an analysis of Internet provider liability under German criminal law and Germany's Teleservices Act. From an international criminal law perspective some international instruments, like the Cybercrime Convention of the Council of Europe, is discussed. National legislation, especially in the context of the European Union, must always be put in the proper regional and international context. The thesis concludes with some thoughts on alternative, or perhaps complementary, methods to fight illegal and criminal conduct on the Internet. This is done not as a critique of the responses to Internet crime, but rather to strengthen the many hands trying to reduce Internet crime. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis handeloor die strafregtelike aanspreekliheid van Internet diensverskaffers. Die fokus val op Duitsland, maar die analise word ook geplaas in 'n wyer, vergelykende konteks. Dit word gedoen met verwysing na Suid-Afrika, sowel as Europa en die VSA. Die tesis demonstreer en bespreek die bestaande regsnorme wat Internet diensverskaffers reguleer met spesifieke verwysing na aanspreeklikheid vir onwettige inhoud op die Internet en internasionale pogings om hierdie probleem aan te spreek. Ter inleiding word daar aangetoon hoe die Internet aanleiding gee tot nuwe vorme van globale kommunikasie en die regsprobleme wat dit tot gevolg het. Dit word gevolg deur 'n ondersoek na die verskillende funksies van Internet verskaffers. 'n Ontleding en bespreking van Internet-spesifieke misdrywe plaas die meer algemene vraagstuk in 'n meer gefokusde konteks. Tradisionele en nuwe vorme van misdaad word bespreek. Hierdie afdeling word gevolg deur 'n ontleding van Internet diensverskaffer aanspreeklikheid ingevolge Duitse reg en die Duitse wetgewing op die terrein van telediens. Uit 'n internasionale strafreg oogpunt word sekere internasionale instrumente, soos die Cybercrime Convention van die Raad van Europa, bespreek. Nasionale wetgewing, veral in die konteks van die Europese Unie, word ook in die relevante regionale en internasionale konteks geplaas. Die tesis word afgesluit met sekere gedagtes oor alternatiewe, of moontlik komplimentêre, metodes in die stryd teen Internet-kriminaliteit. Dit moet nie gesien word as kritiek op die huidige stand van sake nie, maar eerder as 'n poging om die talle rolspelers in die stryd teen Internet misdaad se hande te sterk.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The lessor's tacit hypothec improves the chances of the lessor to recover rent in arrears. This real security right arises by operation of law and attaches to the lessee's movable property found on the leased premises when rent is due but not paid. The extension of the lessor‟s tacit hypothec to third parties' property is the remedy's most controversial feature. The extension is supposedly based on one of two theoretical justifications, namely implied consent and the doctrine of estoppel. According to the implied-consent theory, the extension is based on the premise that the third party consented (explicitly or by implication) that his property can serve as security for the payment of the lessee's arrear rent. The basis of the second theory, the doctrine of estoppel, operates as a limitation on the rei vindicatio of the third party. Over the years discourse has shown that there are uncertainties surrounding these justifications. Recent debate has also shown that if constitutionally challenged, the extension of the lessor's tacit hypothec could amount to arbitrary deprivation of third parties' property. The aim of this thesis is to establish whether and how the existing common law principles that provide for the extension of the lessor's tacit hypothec over property belonging to third parties are affected by section 25(1) of the Constitution. Consequently, the thesis describes, analyses and scrutinises the general principles regulating the lessor's tacit hypothec, and more specifically the extension of the lessor's tacit hypothec to third parties' property, in view of section 25(1) of the Constitution. Taking into considering the recent statutory protection of third parties' property, the thesis concludes that the extension of the lessor's tacit hypothec does not constitute an arbitrary deprivation of third parties' property because correct application of the common law principles that provide for the extension and the statutory protection that has been introduced to exclude a large number of cases from the reach of the extension adequately protect third parties' property interests. Therefore, the requirements of section 25(1) are satisfied. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die verhuurder se stilswyende hipoteek verbeter sy kanse om agterstallige huur van sy huurder in te vorder. Wanneer die huur opeisbaar word, maar die huurder versuim om tydig te betaal, kom hierdie saaklike sekerheidsreg deur regswerking tot stand en dit dek alle roerende sake wat op die verhuurde perseel gevind word. Die uitbreiding van die stilwyende hipoteek na eiendom wat aan derde partye behoort is die remedie se mees kontroversiële eienskap. Hierdie uitbreiding van die hipoteek se toepassingsveld berus na bewering op een van twee regverdigingsgronde, naamlik die derde se geïmpliseerde toestemming en die leerstuk van estoppel. Volgens die geïmpliseerde toestemming-teorie kan die hipoteek na derdes se bates uitgebrei word op die veronderstelling dat sodanige derde partye toegestem het (uitdruklik of by implikasie) dat hulle eiendom as sekuriteit vir betaling van die huurder se agterstallige huur mag dien. Die tweede teorie steun op die beperking wat die leerstuk van estoppel op die rei vindicatio van die derde party plaas. Oor die jare het debatte aangedui dat daar onsekerhede rondom hierdie regverdigingsgronde bestaan. Onlangse debatte het ook aangetoon dat, indien dit grondwetlik getoets word, die uitbreiding van die hipoteek moontlik mag neerkom op ‟n arbitrêre ontneming van die derdes se eiendom. Die doel van hierdie tesis is om vas te stel of en hoe die bestaande gemeenregtelike beginsels wat die stilswyende hipoteek na bates van derdes uitbrei deur artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet beïnvloed word. Die tesis bespreek, analiseer en toets gevolglik die algemene beginsels van die verhuurder se stilswyende hipoteek, en meer spesifiek die uitbreiding van die hipoteek na bates wat aan derdes behoort, in die lig van artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet. Met inagneming van die beskerming wat derde party se eiendom in terme van onlangse wetgewing geniet, bevind die tesis dat die uitgebreide toepassing van die stilswyende hipoteek nie op ʼn arbitrêre ontneming van derde partye se eiendom neerkom nie omdat korrekte toepassing van die gemeenregtelike beginsels wat vir die uitbreiding voorsiening maak, in kombinasie met die wetgewende uitsluiting van ‟n groot aantal sake wat aan derdes behoort, voldoende beskerming aan die belange van derdes verleen. Die vereistes van artikel 25(1) word dus bevredig.

The scope of this thesis in public law discussed the abstract judicial review in Sweden and Germany, which is practiced by a specified organ. In Sweden, the abstract judicial review is practiced by the Council on Legislation, and in Germany by the German Federal Constitutional Court. This study focuses on how the Swedish Council on Legislation and the German Constitutional Court differ in the practice of the abstract norm control. Moreover, a theoretical discussion is applied to regarding whether the Swedish justice system is in need of setting up a constitutional court or whether the Swedish Council on Legislation should be in a stronger position. Throughout this study, we concluded that the Swedish legal system is not in need to establish a Constitutional Court or another organ for the maintenance of an adequate standard norm control in Sweden. To this end, we suggest that the abstract norm control in Sweden by the law's compatibility with the constitution should be strong, but that there may be reason to further strengthen the review of the Council on Legislation. For instance, enhancing the investigation could be done by creating a legal secretariat and subsequently emphasizing the council’s independence from the parliament and government. By reinforcing the council with legal expertise, such as linking draftsmen to the council, can thus make the council’s opinion legally binding.

This thesis examines various aspects of English and Canadian charity law in terms of their relationship with the contested categories of ‘public law’ and ‘private law’. It argues that the law of charities can be regarded as a hybrid legal discipline in both a general or categorical sense, and in the context-specific or functional sense that both the conditions for obtaining charitable status, and the regulation of the conduct of charities and their trustees, are continually being adjusted in such a way as to maintain in a broad sense a functional equilibrium between individual project pursuit and collective project pursuit; that is to say, an equilibrium between the protection of the autonomy of property-owning individuals to control and direct their own wealth, and the furtherance of competing public interests or visions of the good. After sketching out the history and nature of the common law charities tradition and the contemporary English and Canadian regulatory regimes, the thesis pursues its analytical and comparative hypotheses by examining two important features of English and Canadian charity law, the public benefit doctrine and the rules of locus standi that determine who may seek relief for misapplications of charity property. It then addresses the comparatively modern issue of the governmental co-optation of charitable resources, considering to what extent modern pressures associated with the retrenchment of welfare states threaten to destabilize charity law’s hybrid equilibrium in EW and Canada. The thesis then turns to the emerging phenomenon of social enterprise, arguing that shifts to charity law’s functional equilibrium may explain the emergence of this ‘post-charitable’ legal form. The thesis concludes with some observations on the hybrid nature of the law of charities, and on the different functional equilibriums between individual project pursuit and collective project pursuit that have been reached by English and Canadian charity law.

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.

Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / Includes bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The forced transfer of immovable property to enforce judgment debts by way of sale in execution has constitutional implications. Firstly, if the property is residential, section 26 of the Constitution (the housing clause) raises the question whether the current legal framework takes sufficient account of the imperative to respect people‟s access to adequate housing. Read with section 36 (the limitation clause), the requirement is that someone‟s home may only be violated if the result is proportionate based on all the relevant circumstances. Secondly, since the home qualifies as “property” for purposes of the section 25 (the property clause), the law that regulates this forced sale may not permit the arbitrary deprivation of property. In other words, it is necessary to also investigate whether the sale in execution of debtors‟ property satisfies the section 25(1) non-arbitrariness test. Therefore, the research problem that this dissertation addresses revolves around the implications of sections 25 and 26 of the Constitution for the “normal” sale-in-execution process. More specifically, the scope of the investigation is limited to forced transfers of residential property as a result of mortgage foreclosure. What makes this perspective interesting is that, in addition to the debtor‟s constitutional rights, the creditor also enjoys constitutional protection by virtue of the limited real right (the mortgage) that is registered over the debtor‟s home. This real security right is also “property” that is worthy of recognition under section 25. To the extent that the National Credit Act places obstacles in the way of creditors‟ right to enforce their debts, this interference may also amount to a deprivation of property, which must satisfy the requirements of the property clause. This dissertation shows that the traditional common law framework of mortgage foreclosure does not give full effect to debtors‟ sections 25 and 26 rights. Nevertheless, based on the subsidiarity principles, I argue that a development of the common law or the creation of unique constitutional defences is not called for. The reason for this submission is that the debt relief mechanisms of the National Credit Act already provide constitutionally appropriate relief for debtors who face the loss of their properties. The available mechanisms – including debt review, debt rearrangement and the right to reinstate credit agreements – are aimed at resolving the root of mortgage foreclosure, namely over-indebtedness. This approach will ensure that mortgage foreclosures have a constitutionally valid and proportionate effect on the rights of both parties to the mortgage relationship. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die afdwinging van vonnisskulde by wyse van die verkoop in eksekusie van onroerende eiendom is ‟n gedwonge oordrag van eiendom met grondwetlike implikasies. Eerstens, waar die eiendom residensieël is, verg artikel 26 van die Grondwet (die behuisingsklousule) dat die huidige regsraamwerk voldoende rekenskap sal gee van die opdrag om mense se toegang tot geskikte behuising te respekteer. Saamgelees met artikel 36 (die beperkingsklousule), mag daar slegs op iemand se reg van toegang tot behuising inbreuk gemaak word indien die impak regverdigbaar is met inagneming van al die relevante omstandighede. Tweedens, aangesien die huis kwalifiseer as “eiendom” vir doeleindes van artikel 25 (die eiendomsklousule), mag die regsreëls wat eksekusieverkope reguleer nie arbitrêre ontnemings van eiendom toelaat nie. Met ander woorde, dit is nodig om ondersoek in te stel of die verkoop in eksekusie van skuldenaars se wonings aan artikel 25(1) se nie-arbitrêrheidstoets voldoen. Die navorsingsprobleem behels dus die implikasies van artikels 25 en 26 van die Grondwet vir die “normale” verkoop-in-eksekusie proses. Die omvang van die ondersoek is spesifiek beperk tot oordragte van residensiële eiendom as gevolg van die oproep van verbande. Wat hierdie perspektief verder interessant maak, tesame met die feit dat skuldenaars grondwetlike regte het, is die feit dat skuldeisers ook grondwetlike beskerming geniet ten aansien van die beperkte saaklike reg (die verband) wat geregistreer is oor die skuldenaar se huis. Hierdie saaklike sekerheidsreg is ook “eiendom” wat erkenning verdien in terme van artikel 25. Vir sover as wat skuldeisers se vermoë om hul skulde af te dwing deur die Nasionale Kredietwet aan bande gelê word, mag hierdie beperkinge moontlik ook op ‟n ontneming van eiendom neerkom. Gevolglik moet hierdie skuldverligtingsmeganismes ook aan die vereistes van die eiendomsklousule voldoen. Hierdie proefskrif wys daarop dat die tradisionele gemeenregtelike raamwerk vir die oproep van verbande nie ten volle effek gee aan skuldenaars se regte onder artikels 25 en 26 nie. Nietemin, met beroep op die subsidiariteitsbeginsels argumenteer ek dat ‟n ontwikkeling van die gemenereg of die skep van unieke grondwetlike remedies nie in hierdie konteks toelaatbaar is nie. Die rede hiervoor is dat die Nasionale Kredietwet se skuldverligtingsmeganismes reeds voorsiening maak vir grondwetlik aanvaarbare verligting vir skuldenaars wat deur die moontlike verlies van hul eiendomme in die gesig gestaar word. Die beskikbare maatreëls – insluitend skuldhersiening, skuldherstrukturering en die reg om kredietooreenkomste te laat herleef – is gemik daarop om die oorsaak van verbandoproeping aan te spreek, naamlik oorverskuldigdheid. Hierdie benadering sal verseker dat die oproep van verbande ‟n grondwetlik geldige en proporsionele effek op die regte van beide partye het. / South African Research Chair in Property Law / National Research Foundation / Ciucci Bursary

Bibliography / Thesis (LLM (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Traditionally, the common law rule as interpreted by South African case law required that mutual consent be obtained in order to relocate a specified servitude of right of way. Since the Linvestment judgment, the legal position pertaining to the unilateral relocation of a specified servitude of right of way is that the location of an existing specified servitude of right of way may be altered unilaterally by the owner of the servient tenement. Unilateral relocation of a specified servitude of right of way will only be allowed if strict requirements are met, namely that the servient owner will be materially inconvenienced in the use of his property if the status quo is maintained; that the relocation will not prejudice the owner of the dominant tenement; and that the servient owner pays all costs incurred in the relocation of the servitude. In order to justify the departure from the common law, the court in Linvestment relied on historical argument, comparative law, and policy arguments to reach the conclusion that a servitude may be relocated unilaterally if it is in the interest of fairness, equity and justice. The court relied on section 173 of the Constitution, which entitles the courts to develop the common law. This decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal has far-reaching implications. A servitude is a limited real right to the property of another person which grants the holder of that right specific entitlements. South African law requires that registration in the deeds registry take place in terms of section 63(1) of the Deeds Registries Act 47 of 1937 as soon as a limited real right in immovable property is created or transferred. Once the servitude is registered, it will be enforceable against the owner of the servient tenement and all his successors in title. When the servient owner is allowed to relocate the servitude unilaterally, it will have the effect of undermining the limited real right that the dominant owner holds in the property in question. This thesis evaluates the extent to which the courts may change common law principles on the basis of fairness, justice and equity. The conclusion is that the policy grounds on which the court based its decision are convincing, as the law cannot remain rigid and needs to be continually changed in order to meet changing conditions. However, the comparative and historical reasons provided for the decision are insubstantial and unconvincing. The thesis points out that there are no historical grounds for the decision, but that more extensive and contextual comparative research does support the decision. This thesis considers the constitutional implications of a flexible legal approach to the unilateral relocation of a specified servitude of right of way and concludes that an approach that allows for unilateral relocation will not amount to an expropriation and will not establish an arbitrary deprivation either, provided that the requirements set out in the decision are applied strictly and that a court order is required for the relocation. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die tradisionele gemeenregtiglike beginsel rakende die verlegging van 'n gespesifiseerde reg van weg het vereis dat wannneer 'n roete eers vasgestel is, die eienaar van die dienende erf dit nie mag verander nie tensy hy toestemming verkry het van die eienaar van die heersende erf. Sedert die uitspraak in Linvestment, is die regsposisie dat die eienaar van die dienende erf wel die ligging van 'n serwituut eensydig mag verander. Die eienaar van die dienende erf sal slegs gemagtig wees om die servituut te verskuif onder omstandighede waar die huidige ligging van die serwituut wesenlike materiële nadeel vir hom meebring, die verskuiwing van die serwituut geen nadeel vir die eienaar van die heersende erf sal veroorsaak nie en mits die eienaar van die dienende erf die kostes wat verband hou met die verskuiwing van die serwituut sal dra. Die hof het op historiese, regsvergelykende en beleidsoorwegings gesteun om die gevolgtrekking te staaf dat 'n serwituut verkuif kan word, selfs al is dit teen die wens van die eienaar van die heersende erf. Die hof het ook beslis dat die howe die inherente bevoegdheid het om die gemenereg te ontwikkel ingevolge artikel 173 van die Grondwet. Die beslissing het verreikende implikasies. 'n Serwituut is 'n beperkte saaklike reg op die saak van iemand anders wat aan die reghebbende bepaalde genots- en gebruiksbevoegdhede ten aansien van daardie saak verleen. Artikel 63(1) van die Registrasie van Aktes Wet 47 van 1937 vereis dat 'n beperkte saaklike reg ten aansien van onroerende goedere geregistreer moet word sodra 'n beperkte saaklike reg gevestig word. Indien die serwituut geregistreer word, sal dit afdwingbaar wees teen die eienaar van die dienende erf asook sy regsopvolgers. Indien die genoemde eienaar gemagtig is om die serwituut eensydiglik te verskuif, sal dit inbreuk maak op die eienaar van die heersende erf se beperkte saaklike regte ten aansien van die dienende erf. Die doel van hierdie tesis is om te evalueer tot watter mate howe daartoe in staat is om die gemenereg te verander op grond van billikheid en geregtigheid. Die gevolgtrekking is dat die hof se beleidsargumente oortuigend is aangesien die reg voortdurend moet verander ten einde te voldoen aan die veranderende omstandighede. Die regsvergelykende en historiese gronde vir die hof se gevolgtrekking is egter onoortuigend. Die tesis illustreer dat daar geen historiese gronde bestaan vir die beslissing nie asook dat meer ekstensiewe en kontekstuele regsvergelykende navorsing wel die hof se beslissing staaf. Hierdie tesis evalueer ook die grondwetlike implikasies van die nuwe reël en kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat die toepassing van 'n benadering ingevolge waarvan die eienaar van „n dienende erf gemagtig word om 'n serwituut eensydig te verskuif, nie 'n onteiening of 'n arbitrêre ontneming teweegbring nie op voorwaarde dat die vereistes soos uiteengesit in die uitspraak aan voldoen word en dat die verkryging van 'n hofbevel 'n moontlike voorvereiste is vir die verskuiwing van 'n serwituut.

Thesis (LLM (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT:The objective of this thesis is to establish whether the notion of public nuisance has a legitimate purpose in post-apartheid South African. Public nuisance originated in English law in the 12th century as a tort-based crime called tort against land and was used to protect the Crown against infringements. This special remedy of the Crown was used in cases of unlawful obstruction of public highways and rivers, damage or injury causing an inconvenience to a class or all of her majesty‟s subjects and a selection of other crimes. The notion of public nuisance was adopted in South African law during the late 19th century. Between its inception and 1943, the notion of public nuisance was applied in line with its original aims, namely to protect and preserve the health, safety and morals of the public at large. Public nuisance regulated unreasonable interferences such as smoke, noise, violence, litter and blockage of roads which originated in a public space or land, as opposed to a private space or land. However, the public nuisance remedy was indirectly used, in a number of cases during the 1990s, by private individuals to apply for an interdict to evict occupiers of informal settlements. In so doing, these private individuals bypassed legislation regulating evictions and in the process disrupted or frustrated new housing developments, especially those provided for in land reform programmes. In fact, it was established that this indirect application of public nuisance is unconstitutional in terms of section 25(1) of the Constitution. Most of the public disturbances originally associated with the public nuisance doctrine are currently provided for in legislation. Since the remedy is now mainly provided for in legislation, the question is whether the doctrine of public nuisance as a Common Law remedy is still relevant in modern South African law. It was concluded, especially after an analysis of two cases during 2009 and 2010, that the notion of public nuisance only has a future in South African law if it is applied iv in the absence of statutory nuisance or any other legislation covering public nuisance offences and where it is not used as an alternative mechanism to evict occupiers. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van die tesis is om vas te stel of publieke oorlas as gemeenregtelike remedie „n geldige doel in post-apartheid Suid-Afrika het. Die remedie bekend as publieke oorlas het ontstaan in 12de eeuse Engelse reg. Hierdie remedie het ontwikkel as „n delikteregtelike en kriminele remedie, met die doel om land wat aan die Kroon behoort te beskerm. Publieke oorlas het, onder andere, toepassing gevind waar daar onwettige obstruksie van publieke hoofweë en riviere was sowel as skade of nadeel wat vir die breë publiek ongerief sou veroorsaak. Ander misdade was ook gekenmerk as „n publieke oorlas. Publieke oorlas is teen die laat 19de eeu in die Suid-Afrikaanse regoorgeneem . Tussen die oorname van die remedie in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg en 1943 is die remedie van publieke oorlas toegepas in lyn met sy oorspronlike doelwitte, naamlik om optrede wat die gesondheid, veiligheid en moraliteit van die breë publiek in gedrang kon bring, te verhoed. Volgens sy oorspronklike doel reguleer publieke oorlas onredelike inmenging soos rook, geraas, geweld en obstruksie van paaie wat op publieke grond of „n publieke spasie ontstaan het. Die remedie van publieke oorlas is, in ‟n reeks sake gedurende die 1990‟s, deur privaat individue indirek gebruik om okkupeerders van informele nedersettings uit te sit. Sodoende het privaat individue die wetgewing wat spesiaal ontwerp is om uitsettings te reguleer vermy en in die proses nuwe behuisingsontwikkelinge ontwrig en gefrustreer, veral in gevalle waarvoor in grondhervormingsprogramme voorsiening gemaak word. Hierdie indirekte toepasing van publieke oorlas is ongrondwetlik omdat dit nie met artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet versoenbaar is nie. Die meerderheid van steurnisse wat gewoonlik met publieke oorlas geassosieer word, word tans deur wetgewing gereguleer. Aangesien die remedie nou hoofsaaklik in wetgewing vervat is, ontstaan die vraag of die leerstuk van publieke oorlas as „n gemeenregtelike remedie nog van enige nut is in die moderne Suid-Afrikaanse reg. vi Die slotsom, veral na die analise van twee sake in 2009 en 2010, was dat die publieke oorlas remedie slegs „n toekoms in Suid-Afrikaanse reg het, indien dit toegepas word in die afwesigheid van statutêre oorlas of enige ander wetgewing wat publieke oorlas oortredinge dek en waar dit nie as „n alternatiewe meganisme gebruik word om okkupeerders uit te sit nie. / National Research Fund

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Plea bargaining describes the act of negotiating and concluding agreements in the criminal procedure. Usually the prosecutor and the accused agree that the accused will plead guilty to the charge brought against him in exchange for some concession from the prosecution. The bargain is not limited to the presented subject. Agreements can contain the non-prosecution or reduction of charges, specific terms of punishment, conditions of probation and much more. In many countries the vast majority of criminal cases are disposed by way of bargaining. Plea bargaining breaches with the concept of a conventional trial and consequently clashes with well-known fundamental principles of the criminal procedure. Moreover, bargaining before criminal trials strongly implicates the constitutionally secured rights of the accused as well as of the public interest. Although plea bargaining is broadly criticized for its implications on essential rules and principles, the use of the practice is widespread. There are clear benefits to the participant, such as to avoid a lengthy trial with an uncertain outcome. South Africa, as a legal system with roots in the common law, adopted the procedure in 2001 with the implementation of s 105A into the Criminal Procedure Act. The German legislature in 2009 decided to regulate what until then had been informal practice by inserting several rules into the German criminal procedure, amongst which s 257c contains the main provisions. The implementation of bargains into the German law has produced tensions particularly due to the inquisitorial basis of the criminal procedure that stands in civil law tradition. This thesis evaluates how South African and German provisions on plea bargaining differ, i.e., on which different backgrounds they are based on, how the bargain procedures are construed and to what extent statutory plea bargaining in both legal systems displaces informal traditional agreements. The comparison is enriching under the aspect that both countries implemented the bargain procedure but had to place them on fundamentally different grounds. Having presented the grounds that motivated the research (Chapter I.), the origins of plea bargaining in general as well as the legal development toward the present statutory provisions in both countries are examined (Chapter II.). The bargain procedures are compared in detail (Chapter IV.). A large part focuses on particular problem areas and how both legal systems cope with them (Chapter V.). The result of the research is summarized in a conclusion (Chapter VI.). / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Pleitonderhandeling kan beskryf word as die proses van onderhandel en die aangaan van ooreenkomste in die strafproses. Die vervolging en die verdediging sal gewoonlik ooreenkom dat die beskuldigde skuldig sal pleit in ruil vir een of meer toegewings deur die vervolging. Ooreenkomste kan insluit die nie-vervolging of vermindering van klagte, spesifieke aspekte van vonnis, voorwaardes van parool en talle meer. In ‘n hele aantal lande word die oorgrote meerderheid van sake afgehandel by wyse van pleitooreenkomste. Dit is egter duidelik dat pleitooreenkomste in konflik is met die konsep van ‘n gewone verhoor en is gevolglik ook in konflik met van die grondbeginsels van die strafprosesreg. Dit raak ook die grondwetlike regte van beskuldigdes en die belange van die samelewing. Ten spyte van hierdie kritiek en meer, is die praktyk van pleitonderhandeling wydverspreid. Daar blyk besliste voordeel te wees vir die deelnemende partye, byvoorbeeld die vermyding van lang verhore met onsekere beslissings. Suid-Afrika (met ‘n sterk gemeenregtelike tradisie) het die praktyk van pleitonderhandeling formeel en per statuut in 2001 aanvaar, met die aanvaarding en invoeging van artikel 105A in die Strafproseswet, 1977. Die wetgewer in Duitsland het in 2009 besluit om die informele praktyk van pleitonderhandeling te formaliseer met die invoeging van sekere bepalings in die Duitse strafproseskode. Hierdie invoeging het sekere spanning veroorsaak in die Duitse strafproses, veral weens die inkwisitoriese tradisie in daardie jurisdiksie. Hierdie tesis evalueer die Suid-Afrikaanse en Duitse benaderings tot pleitonderhandelinge, hoe dit verskil, die verskillende regskulturele kontekste waarbinne dit plaasvind, en die mate waartoe pleitonderhandeling in beide sisteme informele ooreenkomste vervang het. Die vergelykende ondersoek bevind dat beide stelsels die pleitooreenkoms ingestel het, maar dit moes doen mvn fundamenteel verskillende gronde. Hoofstuk I (die motivering vir die studie), word gevolg deur ‘n historiese ondersoek (Hoofstuk II). Die verdere hoofstukke fokus op die regsvergelykende aspekte en die gevolgtrekkings word in Hoofstuk VI uiteengesit.