ISSN: 2521-2575
Affiliations: North-West University
Source: Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law & Practice, Volume 10 Issue 1, 2024, p. 126 – 127
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCCL/V10/i1a6
None
ISSN: 1996-2185
Affiliations: Junior Lecturer at the Vaal University of Technology
Source: South African Mercantile Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 3, 2025, p. 257 – 279
https://doi.org/10.47348/SAMLJ/v37/i3a1
This study examines the legal and ethical implications of unilateral amendments in e-commerce business-to-consumer (B2C) contracts of necessity in South Africa, with a focus on vulnerable consumers. As online transactions become increasingly prevalent, businesses often reserve the right to unilaterally modify contract terms, potentially disadvantaging consumers who rely on essential services. The research employs a qualitative approach, analysing relevant legislation, case law, and scholarly literature to assess the current regulatory framework governing such amendments. Findings reveal significant gaps in consumer protection, particularly for vulnerable groups who may lack alternatives or the capacity to fully understand complex contractual changes. The study argues that existing laws inadequately address the power imbalance between businesses and consumers in the digital marketplace, particularly in relation to essential services. Recommendations include strengthening legislative safeguards, enhancing transparency requirements for amendments, and implementing measures to ensure fair and reasonable changes to contract terms. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on consumer rights in the digital age and provides insights for policymakers, legal practitioners, and businesses that seek to balance commercial interests with ethical considerations and consumer protection in South Africa’s evolving e-commerce landscape.
ISSN: 1996-2185
Affiliations: Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Centre for Banking Law, University of Johannesburg
Source: South African Mercantile Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 3, 2025, p. 280 – 298
https://doi.org/10.47348/SAMLJ/v37/i3a2
This paper explores the importance of promoting and sustaining integrity in financial institutions and among the personnel entrusted with the management of other people’s wealth, for example trustees. Fiduciary responsibilities and trusteeship are prevalent in many financial systems globally. As such, it is essential for financial institutions to promote good ethical conduct so as to maintain public trust, curb financial malpractice and safeguard the overall integrity of the financial markets. Prior to addressing the risks emanating from the lack of integrity in the financial sector, it is essential to identify the underpinning elements that contribute to the lapse of integrity. The lack of integrity in financial institutions and their relevant personnel often results in conflicts of interest, corruption, lack of transparency and regulatory oversight. This paper argues that promoting and maintaining integrity in the management of other people’s wealth is not merely a regulatory obligation but also a moral imperative. Robust regulatory mechanisms and fostering a culture of ethics and accountability in the financial sector could address the root causes of integrity breaches and financial malpractices. Considering the interconnectedness of the financial space, cross-border coordination and the establishment of international best practices to enhance integrity are indispensable. This paper proposes proactive international cooperation and collaboration to enable early identification of emerging risks and coordinated responses globally. An environment that motivates self-reporting of potential misconduct and protects whistleblowers, could rectify ethical lapses promptly. The author explores the potential of technologies such as artificial intelligence and block chain as measures to enhance transparency and security in wealth management.
ISSN: 1996-2185
Affiliations: Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Fort Hare; LLD Candidate in the Faculty of Law, University of Fort Hare
Source: South African Mercantile Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 3, 2025, p. 299 – 317
https://doi.org/10.47348/SAMLJ/v37/i3a3
Scholarly views diverge on how the law or legal rules should satisfactorily regulate the 4IR or 4IR technologies and algorithms. Some scholars postulate that because the 4IR develops rapidly the law should consequently be tightened to control the ever-changing character of these innovations. This exists because of the propensity of the technologies developing beyond state or government control. With this development, legal rules prove to be insufficient to manage the 4IR and control its algorithmic outcomes. Accordingly, regulators will often resort to, amongst others, over-regulations and dumb regulatory structures. The latter signifies frameworks which are not established from the proper understanding of the technologies to be regulated. They fail to provide adequate solutions to the whole technology regulatory agenda. Therefore, the contribution hypothesises that legal rules are not the solitary mechanism to the overall study of technology regulations. The way the 4IR intersects with ethics is essential to the creation of a smart way of regulating, that is, Smart Regulations. Smart Regulations accept that the essence of regulating is not championed though a single state actor. Instead, regulations are a collaborative (consumers, state, and stakeholders) process that enjoins regulators to scrutinise the ethical behaviour of the 4IR and 4IR technologies.
ISSN: 1996-2185
Affiliations: Senior Lecturer, Department of Jurisprudence, Unisa College of Law; Director, Bophela Molekane Inc Attorneys
Source: South African Mercantile Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 3, 2025, p. 318 – 331
https://doi.org/10.47348/SAMLJ/v37/i3a4
This article examines the unintended exclusionary consequences of pre-contractual affordability assessments under the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (NCA), with a particular focus on low-income consumers seeking mortgage finance. While the NCA aims to promote responsible lending and protect consumers from reckless credit, its implementation has produced structural barriers that limit access to housing finance for those most in need. The article demonstrates that affordability assessments, while protective in intent, often reproduce inequality by privileging consumers with formal income, established credit histories, and high levels of financial literacy. The central contribution of this article is to show that the current regime, although legally compliant, is substantively unjust because it systematically excludes low-income households from access to mortgage credit. It argues that this exclusion undermines s 26 of the Constitution and South Africa’s international obligations to progressively realise the right to adequate housing. To address these challenges, the article proposes reforms aimed at recalibrating affordability assessments toward substantive equity. These include recognition of informal income and collective household contributions, the development of inclusive credit scoring models, the integration of financial literacy into the lending process, shared-risk models between the state and private lenders, and strengthened transparency obligations. By advancing these reforms, the article contributes to debates on how consumer credit regulation can balance protection with inclusion, thereby aligning mortgage finance with South Africa’s constitutional and developmental objectives.