The international drug control system created by multi-lateral drug control conventions consists effectively of two sub-systems: the international legal regime to regulate the lawful production, distribution and consumption of drugs (thus defining the lawful activities that can be pursued with respect to drugs); and the international legal regime which is aimed specifically at suppressing illicit activities relating to drugs. This article charts the early development of the international legal regime for the suppression of illicit drug trafficking under the League of Nations so as to place its later development under the United Nations in historical context. The body of the article examines the substantive legal provisions of the 1936 Convention for the Suppression of the Illicit Traffic in Dangerous Drugs and investigates why these early measures were either restrained or, when more robust, had little practical effect. What light this throws on the prospects for success of later measures, especially those in the 1988 UN Drug Trafficking Convention is then considered.
The topic under discussion is, of necessity, only a small part of a vast field, namely what recognition a family court in Europe will accord family laws practised by foreign migrant communities but which clash with the court's domestic legal culture. The massive migration from former Western colonies experienced in virtually all European jurisdictions since the 60s and 70s is an issue of increasing importance particularly in the realm of international family law.
An unmistakable feature of international commerce during the last four decades has been the active participation of developing countries, usually in the form of contractual relationships with foreign private parties. Development economists believe that many developing countries do not have, nor can they generate enough savings to finance industrialisation. The direct result is their inability effectively to pursue their development aspirations without foreign investment. Knowing that doing business with a developing state is tantamount to dealing with a partner whose legal rights, prerogatives and competence in the domestic and international legal orders may be vastly superior to those of the foreign investor, the latter has consistently demonstrated an 'almost omnivorous desire for protection of his investment'. Consequently, state contracts with foreign private parties, the subject of this paper, consistently contain, inter alia, provisions for the settlement of disputes by arbitration and for the regulation of the contracts by a body of law acceptable to the investor.
This article considers the various viewpoints on the controversial nature of section 247 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973. Section 70, sext of the 1926 Act, now section 247 of Act 61 of 1973, was introduced by Act 23 of 1939. It provides that: "Any provision, whether contained in the articles of a company or in any other contract with the company, and whether express or implied, which purports to exempt any director or officer or the auditor of the company from any liability which by law would otherwise attach to him in respect of any negligence, default, breach of duty or breach of trust of which he may be guilty in relation to the company, or to indemnify him against any such liability, is void." The corresponding section in the English Act was section 205 (currently section 310 of the Companies Act 1985) which was first introduced to alter the existing law that articles could effectively exempt a director or other officer from liability for loss caused by breach of duty, unless the breach was dishonest or wilful. Whether these provisions prohibit exemption from liability only, or also invalidate provisions in the articles which, being consistent with the general law, reduce or abrogate any duty of a director or other officer, is controversial.
In this article, initially, the question of delictual liability as a result of adultery in terms of indigenous law is discussed. In this regard, the article depends chiefly on ethnographic research. In view of the judicial acculturation process operating within indigenous judicial systems it is often difficult, if not impossible, to determine whether a legal rule is still current and valid. The case law which has been developed in this regard, as well as the relevant legislation which has been made applicable in the meantime, require independent and supplementary research. Against the background of South African indigenous law with regard to liability resulting from adultery the universal legal process of the psycho-sexual liberation of women is explained and projected. For interest's sake reference is also made to the indigenous law of Namibia.
In this contribution the current legal developments in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe with regards to principal legislation, government notices and judicial decisions are briefly descriptionbed.