oa Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa - The convenience of jurisdiction
|Article Title||The convenience of jurisdiction|
|© Publisher:||Institute of Foreign and Comparative Law|
|Journal||Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa|
|Affiliations||1 University of Transkei|
|Publication Date||Nov 1982|
|Pages||344 - 346|
|Keyword(s)||Apartheid, Bophuthatswana, Estate Agents Board v Lek 1979, Independent states, Jurisdiction, Policy of separate development, South African law, South African Railways and Harbours v Chairman, Bophuthatswana Central Road Transportation Board and Another 1982 and Supreme Court Act|
The case of South African Railways and Harbours v Chairman, Bophuthatswana Central Road Transportation Board and Another 1982 3 SA 24 (B) is an interesting example of one of the many intricate legal problems which can result from the policy of separate development. In this case the Board had granted certain motor carrier certificates to a company known as Rent-a-Bakkie Holdings (Pty) Ltd. The applicant applied to court in terms of Rule 53 to have a decision of the Board set aside on review. The difficulty facing the applicant was that Rent-a-Bakkie clearly had sufficient interest in the matter to be joined as respondents and the company was a peregrinus in Bophuthatswana. It appeared moreover that it had no attachable assets within the area of jurisdiction of the court and was unwilling to consent to the jurisdiction of the court. The ultimate question in this case is, was the company subject to the jurisdiction of the court?
Article metrics loading...