1887

n Journal for Juridical Science - The role of public policy in the non-enforcement of foreign judgments arising from gambling debts in South African courts : a comparative overview

Volume 32, Issue 2
  • ISSN : 0258-252X
USD

 

Abstract

The aim of the article is to ascertain whether a foreign judgment, arising from a gambling debt in a foreign land-based casino, would be enforceable in South African courts in light of the partial legalisation of gambling within South Africa. The provisions of the 32 / 1988 as well as the common law are discussed with specific reference to the possible "public policy" -exception preventing the enforcement of such foreign judgments. The reported judgment of 2003 JDR 0792 (T) is examined and evaluated in light of the 7 / 2004. The existing foreign precedents in Malaysia, Switzerland, two states in the USA namely, California and New York, and Canada are referred to, to illustrate the divergent public policies in this regard as well as the varied interpretation of the concept of international comity. The outcome reached in the Malaysian courts is similar to South Africa and also based on reasons of public policy, although religion seems to have played a more important role in the Malaysian decision.The decisions in Switzerland, California, New York and Canada, however, came to a different conclusion based on a changed public policy and for reasons of comity, although it is concluded that it is uncertain whether other, more conservative states in the USA, will follow suit.


Die doel van die artikel is om vas te stel of 'n buitelandse hofbevel, wat voortspruit uit 'n dobbelskuld aangegaan in 'n oorsese casino, afdwingbaar sal wees in 'n Suid-Afrikaanse hof in die lig van die wettiging van sekere dobbelgeleenthede in Suid-Afrika. Die 32 / 1988 sowel as die gemenereg word bespreek met spesifieke verwysing na die 'openbare beleid'-uitsondering wat afdwingbaarheid van 'n buitelandse hofbevel kan verhinder. Die gerapporteerde uitspraak van 2003 JDR 0792 (T) word ondersoek en ge-evalueer in die lig van die 7 / 2004. Daar word verwys na die beskikbare presedente in Maleisië, Switserland, twee state in die VSA naamlik Kalifornië en New York, en Kanada ten einde die verskeidenheid van openbare beleide, asook die verskillende interpretasies van internasionale hoflikheid, te illustreer. Die konklusie in die Maleisiese hof is soortgelyk aan die Suid-Afrikaanse uitspraak en ook gebaseer op openbare beleid, hoewel godsdiens klaarblyklik 'n belangrike rol daar gespeel het. Die uitsprake in die howe van Switserland, Kalifornië, New York en Kanada het egter tot 'n ander slotsom gekom - hoewel ook gebaseer op openbare beleid en vir redes van internasionale hoflikheid, hoewel dit onseker is of ander, meer konserwatiewe state in die VSA dieselfde slotsom sal bereik.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/juridic/32/2/EJC55590
2007-12-01
2016-12-10

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error