The original reception legislation during the period of colonialism falls roughly within the period descriptionbed by historians as the "age of imperialism" wherein occurred what is called the "scramble for Africa". It is submitted, however, that these expressions distort the position so far as Britain was concerned and tend to prejudge the whole enquiry. This paper suggests that, on the available evidence, (i) there was no intention on the part of Britain to create an empire in Africa or establish any permanent presence there, (ii) with the exception of statute law, the original reception laws envisaged a timeless reception, and (iii) the law introduced was intended to apply only to the transient European population.
The interesting question of the justiciability of a foreign sovereign state before South African courts was decided fairly recently in the Cape Provincial Division. In Lendalease Finance Company (Ply) Limited v Corporation de Mercadeo Agricola and Others, the question arose as to whether a foreign state-owned corporation which had concluded a contract with a South African company, was immune from the jurisdiction of the South African courts in an application for attachment ad fundandam jurisdictionem brought by the South African Company. The issue of the immunity of the sovereign before municipal courts is discussed in this article.
This article will try to show how in the Federal Republic the conflicting goals of criminal procedure are balanced and to what extent the criminal justice system is embedded in its social and political life.
In Nduli and Another v Minister of Justice and Others, 1978, 1 SA 893, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of South Africa, for the first time in its history, expressly pronounced on the applicability of customary international law in South African law.