25.04.2013 Views

key to the study guide - Name

key to the study guide - Name

key to the study guide - Name

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

law. Where <strong>the</strong>re is nothing <strong>to</strong> be found on a particular point in <strong>the</strong><br />

sources of our law, <strong>the</strong> judge can turn <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> law of o<strong>the</strong>r countries <strong>to</strong><br />

try <strong>to</strong> find a suitable legal principle.<br />

To summarise<br />

The authoritative sources of our law must be consulted in <strong>the</strong><br />

following order:<br />

(1) statute law<br />

(2) cus<strong>to</strong>mary law<br />

(3) case law<br />

(4) old authorities on Roman-Dutch law<br />

(5) Roman law<br />

O<strong>the</strong>r sources which can be consulted are<br />

. modern textbooks and o<strong>the</strong>r academic works<br />

. foreign law<br />

Now you know what <strong>the</strong> sources of our law are and <strong>the</strong>ir order of<br />

precedence. In <strong>the</strong> case of case law, you also have <strong>to</strong> understand what <strong>the</strong><br />

precedent system is and how it works.<br />

2 THE PRECEDENT SYSTEM<br />

The precedent system or doctrine of stare decisis (which means ``<strong>to</strong> stand by<br />

previous judgments'') implies that if a court has given a particular<br />

decision, it and those courts which are subordinate <strong>to</strong> it are bound by <strong>the</strong><br />

decision and must in future give <strong>the</strong> same decision on <strong>the</strong> same point. The<br />

reason for this doctrine is mainly <strong>to</strong> achieve uniformity in <strong>the</strong> application<br />

of legal rules and <strong>to</strong> ensure a measure of legal certainty.<br />

Therefore, when a judge has decided what <strong>the</strong> applicable rule is in a<br />

particular case and has interpreted it or, where necessary, has developed it,<br />

that application and interpretation or development must be followed in<br />

future in all similar cases, for <strong>the</strong> sake of legal certainty and uniformity.<br />

Prior <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> coming in<strong>to</strong> operation of <strong>the</strong> final Constitution on 4 February<br />

1997, a court could not make any new legal rules and <strong>the</strong> judge's function<br />

was purely <strong>to</strong> state <strong>the</strong> law and not <strong>to</strong> create it. A judge could only<br />

determine <strong>the</strong> existing legal rules and <strong>the</strong>n interpret <strong>the</strong>m. Section 8(3) of<br />

<strong>the</strong> Constitution (Act 108 of 1996) now expressly determines that when<br />

applying a provision of <strong>the</strong> Bill of Rights (contained in ch 2 of <strong>the</strong><br />

Constitution) <strong>to</strong> a natural or juristic person, <strong>the</strong> court in order <strong>to</strong> give<br />

effect <strong>to</strong> a right in <strong>the</strong> Bill, must give effect <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> common law or, if<br />

necessary, develop <strong>the</strong> common law <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> extent that legislation does not<br />

give effect <strong>to</strong> that right. The old rule that it is merely <strong>the</strong> function of a<br />

judge <strong>to</strong> state <strong>the</strong> law and not <strong>to</strong> create it, <strong>the</strong>refore no longer applies<br />

9

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!