Placing the uneducated and ignorant at a disadvantage It is trite that as long as all the principles of the Law of contract are satisfied, any contract will be enforceable in a court of law. 'This is the case even if the contract was entered into orally. However, there are a few exceptions to this fundamental rule. As AJ Kerr points out in his book The Law of Sale and Lease 2 ed (Butterworths 1996) at 63
Two recent statements made by high court judges have prompted me to challenge the view that academic and intellectual standards are declining. The first is the following statement made by Van der Walt DJP in Aarons v Law Society of Transvaal (Society of Advocates of Witwatersrand Intervening) 1997 (3) A 750* at 758G-H. 'There is a lowering of academic standard of practitioners but there can never be and there must never be any compromise on the standard of honesty and integrity required of practitioners and officers of this court.
New r 37A in force in Cape high court Rule 37A has been in operation in the Cape high court on an experimental basis for a number of years. From the outset the purpose was to extend the procedure under r 37 of the Uniform rules of Court, which provides for a mandatory pre-trial conference, into a more effective management mechanism for ensuring that cases are brought to trial speedily and cost-efficiently.
The Divorce Amendment Act 95 of 1996 In his article in 1997 DR 49 Ashraf Mahomed claimed that: 'The Divorce Amendment Act is geared toward creating a harmonious co-existence between our secular laws and various religious and cultural affiliations. With this move: our legislature has taken religious freedom and individual human rights to new heights.' Ever since I read the article, I have been wondering whether the writer's enthusiasm about its effect on religious freedom and human rights has not carried his judgment to heights which may not be warranted.