FUR2601 MCQ
EXAM PACK
2023
UPDATED
QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS
, TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 MEMORANDUM FOR COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS
1.1 First compulsory assignment
1.2 Second compulsory assignment
2 CONCLUSION
Dear Student
This tutorial letter contains the memorandum for the first and second compulsory assignments.
1 MEMORANDUM FOR COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS
1.1 FIRST COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENT
For the first assignment, you were required to select the correct answer.
1. In the substantive stage of Bill of Rights litigation, the onus is first on the respondent, who
must show that he/she infringed the applicant’s rights.
1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must show that an
infringement of a right has taken place.
2) True, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the respondent, who must show that
he/she infringed the applicant’s rights.
3) False, in the substantive stage the onus is on the respondent to indicate that the applicant’s
rights can be limited.
4) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is on the applicant, to show that the infringement is
not justifiable in terms of section 36 of the Constitution.
Answer: 1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must
show that an infringement of a right has taken place.
2
, FUR2601/201
2. Section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are specifically excluded from
the protection of the rights in the Bill of Rights.
1) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution excludes juristic persons from the protection of the
rights in the Bill of Rights because of the nature of these rights and the nature of juristic
persons.
2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are entitled to the rights in
the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the nature of the juristic person.
3) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that only natural persons can lay claim to the
rights in the Bill of Rights.
4) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that all juristic persons are entitled to all the
rights in the Bill of Rights.
Answer: 2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are
entitled to the rights in the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the
nature of the juristic person.
3. Section 39 of the Constitution, the interpretation clause, provides that any court, tribunal or
forum, when interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider
foreign law.
1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when
interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider foreign law.
2) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when
interpreting the Bill of Rights, may consider international law and must consider foreign law.
3) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum should only
consider national law when interpreting the rights in the Bill of Rights.
4) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum, when
interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider foreign law,
however, only as far as it pertains to matters of state security.
Answer: 1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum
when interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider
foreign law.
4. In Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
“appropriate relief” referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief
in the event of a constitutional rights violation.
3
, 1) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
“appropriate relief” referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief
in the event of a constitutional rights violation.
2) False, in Ferreira v Levin the Constitutional Court found that the term “appropriate relief”
referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief in the event of a
constitutional rights violation.
3) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
appropriate relief referred to a declaration of invalidity as a discretionary remedy in the event of
a constitutional rights violation.
4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that it was left
to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular circumstances.
Answer: 4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found
that it was left to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular
circumstances.
5. In Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg the Constitutional Court found that the right to water did
not require the state to provide every person with sufficient water on demand.
1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy was a
reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.
2) False, the Constitutional Court found that every citizen has the right to unlimited clean water.
3) True, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water can be restricted if municipalities
struggle to source clean water.
4) False, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water could reasonably be restricted to
2 litres of water per person per day.
Answer: 1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy
was a reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.
1.2 SECOND COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENT
Question
Ms Ithabeleng Selebalo is interested in running as an independent candidate in the upcoming
national elections. According to the Electoral Act 73 of 1998, adult citizens may be elected to
the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures only through their membership of political
parties.
4
EXAM PACK
2023
UPDATED
QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS
, TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 MEMORANDUM FOR COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS
1.1 First compulsory assignment
1.2 Second compulsory assignment
2 CONCLUSION
Dear Student
This tutorial letter contains the memorandum for the first and second compulsory assignments.
1 MEMORANDUM FOR COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS
1.1 FIRST COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENT
For the first assignment, you were required to select the correct answer.
1. In the substantive stage of Bill of Rights litigation, the onus is first on the respondent, who
must show that he/she infringed the applicant’s rights.
1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must show that an
infringement of a right has taken place.
2) True, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the respondent, who must show that
he/she infringed the applicant’s rights.
3) False, in the substantive stage the onus is on the respondent to indicate that the applicant’s
rights can be limited.
4) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is on the applicant, to show that the infringement is
not justifiable in terms of section 36 of the Constitution.
Answer: 1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must
show that an infringement of a right has taken place.
2
, FUR2601/201
2. Section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are specifically excluded from
the protection of the rights in the Bill of Rights.
1) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution excludes juristic persons from the protection of the
rights in the Bill of Rights because of the nature of these rights and the nature of juristic
persons.
2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are entitled to the rights in
the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the nature of the juristic person.
3) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that only natural persons can lay claim to the
rights in the Bill of Rights.
4) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that all juristic persons are entitled to all the
rights in the Bill of Rights.
Answer: 2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are
entitled to the rights in the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the
nature of the juristic person.
3. Section 39 of the Constitution, the interpretation clause, provides that any court, tribunal or
forum, when interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider
foreign law.
1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when
interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider foreign law.
2) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when
interpreting the Bill of Rights, may consider international law and must consider foreign law.
3) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum should only
consider national law when interpreting the rights in the Bill of Rights.
4) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum, when
interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider foreign law,
however, only as far as it pertains to matters of state security.
Answer: 1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum
when interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider
foreign law.
4. In Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
“appropriate relief” referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief
in the event of a constitutional rights violation.
3
, 1) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
“appropriate relief” referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief
in the event of a constitutional rights violation.
2) False, in Ferreira v Levin the Constitutional Court found that the term “appropriate relief”
referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief in the event of a
constitutional rights violation.
3) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
appropriate relief referred to a declaration of invalidity as a discretionary remedy in the event of
a constitutional rights violation.
4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that it was left
to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular circumstances.
Answer: 4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found
that it was left to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular
circumstances.
5. In Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg the Constitutional Court found that the right to water did
not require the state to provide every person with sufficient water on demand.
1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy was a
reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.
2) False, the Constitutional Court found that every citizen has the right to unlimited clean water.
3) True, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water can be restricted if municipalities
struggle to source clean water.
4) False, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water could reasonably be restricted to
2 litres of water per person per day.
Answer: 1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy
was a reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.
1.2 SECOND COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENT
Question
Ms Ithabeleng Selebalo is interested in running as an independent candidate in the upcoming
national elections. According to the Electoral Act 73 of 1998, adult citizens may be elected to
the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures only through their membership of political
parties.
4
