MRL3701 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 1 2026 - DUE 24 March 2026;

MRL3701 Assignment 2
(COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 1 2026 - DUE 24
March 2026;

, MRL3701 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 1 2026 - DUE 24 March 2026; In
Harksen v Lane 1998 (1) SA 300 (CC), section 21 of the Insolvency Act was challenged in the
Constitutional Court. In this case, Harksen argued that section 21 infringed her rights because it
amounted to an expropriation of her property. With reference to relevant legislation, provide the
reasons why the Constitutional Court found that section 21 did not infringe on her rights in terms
of the Interim Constitution




MRL3701 – MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS LAW

ASSIGNMENT 2: HARKSEN v LANE (1998) 1 SA 300 (CC) – SECTION 21 OF THE
INSOLVENCY ACT

Semester 1, 2026
Due Date: 24 March 2026
Institution: University of South Africa (UNISA)




TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Background of the Case
3. Overview of Section 21 of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936
4. The Constitutional Challenge under the Interim Constitution
5. The Court’s Reasoning and Legal Analysis
5.1 Expropriation and Property Rights
5.2 Limitations on Rights and the Principle of Reasonableness
5.3 Purpose of Section 21 and Public Interest Considerations
6. The Court’s Findings
7. Implications for Property Law and Insolvency Law
8. Conclusion