The purpose of this article is to examine some of the devices traditionally employed in natural resource contracts and other agreements to protect such contracts from the national measures of African states. Their effectiveness to protect investors are considered and comparisons are drawn with the Australian experience because, although Australia is of the west, like most African states, it imports capital to exploit most of its natural resources. It could therefore, offer some interesting comparisons with the African experience. The comparisons acknowledge the differences in the political and economic environments of Australia and Africa and the fact that such environments affect the treatment of foreign investments. It must be noted that it is not only investors who require protection; host states often also require protection from the possible deleterious effects of foreign investment.
From the exposition of the international legal rules governing carrier liability in the different modes of international transport, it is clear that there is a discernible trend running from Roman law to the present. This trend is summarised in in the article as a number of principles.
In this article the author reflects on some of the anxieties expressed and demands made by white minority groups in certain of the erstwhile colonies to the north of South Africa. A case for such a comparative survey emerges when it is seen that the apprehensions and fears of minorities voiced in South Africa today, are similar to those heard - and projected as a dominant issue - in these erstwhile colonies during the transitional years prior to their independence. The issue of human rights too, - as new to Africa then as it is to South Africa today - was anxiously discussed and debated. More importantly, as is happening in South Africa today, such apprehensions and demands clearly complicated efforts to reach a negotiated settlement causing a bitterness and frustration which survived among blacks long after independence.
Two questions are posed in this article regarding the incola plaintiff and the jurisdiction of the court. The article found that whatever the intention of the Appellate Division, the Briscoe decision now clearly makes it a requirement that, irrespective of whether the plaintiff is an incola or a peregrinus, the cause of action must have arisen within a court's jurisdictional area before consent will confer jurisdiction. Finally, it is submitted that this requirement will hold few practical implications. Should both parties wish to litigate before the plaintiff's court, an attachment of some property of the defendant can easily be arranged. Regrettably however, rather than consent being sufficient to vest the court with jurisdiction, the expense of an application to obtain an order for attachment ad fundandam jurisdictionem will have to be incurred before the court will hear a matter.
The case of "In the Estate of Guiseppe Pino Barretta (Deceased) is interesting and important for a number of reasons. In the first place contentious cases on the law of succession are extremely rare in Malawi. For this reason the Barretta case provided the High Court with a singular opportunity to state the law firmly and clearly on the relevant aspect of the law of wills. It is the view of this article that this opportunity was not fully utilised. The court not only confused the principles of law applicable but also misstated them, as explained in the article.
The law of succession can be defined as "the branch of the law that regulates what is to happen to a person's assets and liabilities (the deceased estate) after his death, and matters incidental thereto." In Roman and Roman-Dutch law it was regarded as part of the law of things. This is not correct, because a deceased estate does not consist of things and real rights only, but also of rights such as personal and intellectual property rights. It is, however, more important to note that the law of succession consists of an admixture of family law and the law of property. This article reviews the changing needs regarding the customary law of succession in South Africa.
The law of succession is not as simplistic as would appear from literature. Succession according to the literature, occurs where the eldest son in a monogamous family or the eldest son of the head wife in a polygamous family succeeds his father according to the principle of primogeniture.. The eldest son as successor takes the place of the deceased family head. He succeeds to all the property of the deceased which he must control in consultation with the widow. The eldest son must maintain the widow and dependants and is responsible for all debts incurred by the deceased family head. Women have no succession rights under customary law. These general principles were put to a panel of men and woman informants in the rural area. Certain general principles were confirmed while there were variations on others. These variations might prove important when future legislation on the customary law of succession is considered.
In this contribution the current legal developments in Bophuthatswana, Botswana, Ciskei, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Transkei, Venda and Zimbabwe with regards to principal legislation, government notices and judicial decisions are briefly descriptionbed.