Suchergebnisse

Hierdie artikel maak daarop aanspraak dat die Suid-Afrikaanse regstelsel sowel die vermoë as die verpligting het om die nodige remediërende funksie te vervul, sodat verdere agteruitgang van die openbare onderwysstelsel gestuit word. Daadwerklike optrede vanuit die regstelsel word in die vooruitsig gestel om openbare amptenare, onderwysvakbondlede en politici wat die reg verontagsaam, te dwing om die heerskappy van die reg en oppergesag van die Grondwet te erken en te respekteer. Die artikel wys daarop dat daar dringende optrede nodig is teen vakbonde soos SADOU, wat volgens alle getuienis die reeds kwesbare onderwysstelsel verder ondermyn. Sowel die aanstigting van gewelddadige optrede tydens langdurige stakingsaksies as die beskerming van lede wat hulle deurlopend skuldig maak aan substandaard-onderrig, moet teengewerk word. Sodanige onprofessionele, onetiese optrede tas die reg van leerders op onderwys ernstig aan. Die Staat se aandeel aan mislukte onderhandelinge en die gevolglike nywerheidsaksies in die openbare sektor, insluitend die onderwys, moet egter nie misgekyk word nie. Die eerste aanbeveling is dat belanghebbendes by die onderwys moet saamwerk om die nodige respek vir die heerskappy van die reg te vestig en af te dwing. In gevalle waar versuim onder amptenare, vakbondlede of politici om die reg te respekteer opgemerk word, moet die belanghebbendes nie skroom om hofsake teen die oortreders aanhangig te maak nie. Die tweede aanbeveling hou verband met die potensieel kragdadige optrede van die howe, soos in Coetzee v National Commissioner of Police 2011 2 SA 227 (GNP) gedemonstreer is. Daar word aanbeveel dat, waar openbare amptenare hulle aan mala fide-optrede skuldig maak, hulle in hul persoonlike hoedanigheid aanspreeklik gehou sal word vir die volle regskoste, eerder as om dit vanuit Staatsfondse te laat vereffen. Dit sal as 'n gepaste straf dien, en ook as 'n afskrikmiddel om ander amptenare te keer om hulle aan soortgelyke wangedrag skuldig te maak. ; http://www.dejure.up.ac.za/index.php/volumes/46-vol-1-2013 ; http://www.dejure.up.ac.za/index.php/volumes

This Article addresses the largely unexplored issue of whether a sovereign may use its power of eminent domain not to pursue an affirmative public use, but rather to prevent an undesired private use (such as a landfill, rehabilitation facility, or other NIMBY-triggering use) from going forward. The author argues that although sovereigns tend to dissemble in these non-use cases based upon an underlying assumption by condemnors and courts alike that non-use takings are not constitutionally permitted, their analysis is in fact, incorrect. It is not the non-use condemnations themselves that are problematic, but the subterfuge that condemnors typically use in pursuing such takings. The resulting lack of transparency in governmental action subverts the political process and weakens private property rights protection.

SummaryThis article addresses the problems related to the use of the Internet in Canada in an international context. Does international law allow Canada to regulate the Internet and its actors even if they are located abroad? Under the constitution, which level of government has the authority to do so? In which circumstances have the courts in Québec and in the common law provinces personal jurisdiction over persons using the Internet in an international context and which law do these courts apply? When are Canadian courts prepared to recognize and enforce foreign judgments involving the Internet and its actors? The author deals with these questions and is of the opinion that in most situations the federal Parliament has the jurisdiction to prescribe and the Canadian courts have the jurisdiction to adjudicate with respect to the Internet and its actors in an international context without violating international law. However, to avoid conflicts of jurisdiction, it would be better to adopt an international convention covering the various aspects of the Internet.

The Americans With Disabilities Act extends protection against discrimination in employment to virtually all workers with disabilities in the United States. Previous federal laws protecting these individuals were limited in scope, not covering the vast majority of public sector employers. The ADA has consequently aroused a great deal of concern among employers. This paper examines the specific effects that the Act will have on organizations and explores some of the implications the Act has for these organizations and human resource management practices.