ISSN: 2517-9543
Affiliations: Dean: Faculty of Law, Thompson Rivers University
Source: Juta’s Insurance Law Bulletin, Volume 28 Issue 2, 2025, p. 22-24
None
ISSN: 2517-9543
Affiliations: Dean: Faculty of Law, Thompson Rivers University
Source: Juta’s Insurance Law Bulletin, Volume 28 Issue 2, 2025, p. 24-26
None
ISSN: 2517-9543
Affiliations: Dean: Faculty of Law, Thompson Rivers University
Source: Juta’s Insurance Law Bulletin, Volume 28 Issue 2, 2025, p. 26-31
None
ISSN: 1996-2185
Affiliations: International Law Researcher and Postdoctoral Fellow,
Walter Sisulu University
Source: South African Mercantile Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 2, 2025, p. 127 – 146
https://doi.org/10.47348/SAMLJ/v37/i2a1
The issue of expropriation of property especially land without compensation and the amendment of s 25 of the Constitution has been topical, notably under the Government of National Unity (GNU). Many leaders, both local and international, have challenged the newly signed Expropriation Act into law. Accordingly, both local and foreign investors are protected mainly by the Constitution of the Republic, the Protection of Investment Act, and the Expropriation Act. Despite the debate on the issue of expropriation of property without compensation, laws in the country, particularly the Expropriation Act, ensure that properties are expropriated with just and equitable compensation, and this position is consistent with both s 25 of the Constitution and international law rules. However, there may be instances where property may be expropriated without compensation under the Expropriation Act, especially where the property has been abandoned. This article examines whether the international law rules governing foreign investment are consistent with the Protection of Investment Act, the Expropriation Act, and s 25 of the Constitution and relevant case law. It argues that the Expropriation Act and the international law rules for foreign investment are consistent with s 25 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa despite the disputes.
ISSN: 1996-2185
Affiliations: Lecturer at The Independent Institute of Education, Varsity College, Cape Town, South Africa
Source: South African Mercantile Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 2, 2025, p. 147 – 181
https://doi.org/10.47348/SAMLJ/v37/i2a2
Burial societies are types of mutual rotating schemes (stokvels) that are integral in indigenous communities in South Africa, providing funeral assistance to members and operating on the periphery of society. They are a necessity given the financial needs to upkeep burial rites in these communities. Burial societies are founded on sui generis contracts that are characterised by flexibility, cultural norms, ubuntu-based dispute resolution and innovative risk mitigation mechanisms. The existing regulatory framework perceives burial societies as entities offering funeral insurance products. Accordingly, this article examines the regulatory frameworks within which burial societies could operate and assesses their suitability. It interrogates their legal personality and contracts which is necessary because the framework applies to entities offering funeral insurance.