Written by students who passed Immediately available after payment Read online or as PDF Wrong document? Swap it for free 4.6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Exam (elaborations)

LCP4804 PORTFOLIO memo

Rating
-
Sold
-
Pages
23
Grade
A+
Uploaded on
02-10-2022
Written in
2022/2023

LCP4804 PORTFOLIO memo

Institution
Course

Content preview

LCP4804 PORTFOLIO
MEMO - OCTOBER 2021
Advanced Indigenous Law
- UNISA

DETAILED FOOTNOTES &
BIBLIOGRAPHY INCLUDED

,QUESTION 1
Critically discuss the differences between living customary law and official customary
law.
[30]


Official Customary Law


In general, the official customary law reflects state interests and is part of state law. The
official version of customary law is found in statutes, law reports, the South African Law
Reform Commission reports, text books, university lectures and other public documents.
According to Ndima, the official version of customary law depends on alien values for
validity. Mogoro J, in Du Plessis v De Klerk 1, points out that customary law "has lamentably
been marginalised and allowed to degenerate into a vitrified set of norms alienated from its
roots in the community". Costa puts it thus:Customary law as it stands is corrupted,
inauthentic and lacking authority. It is a foreign imposition, a stranger in Africa.2


In Fosi v Road Accident Fund,3 the court put it as follows:


Indigenous African customary law has occupied an unfortunate position in the legal history of
our country. The fact is that it was hardly recognized by the law-makers and was accordingly
scarcely applied in the South African courts. It enjoyed the status of being known that it
existed and its continued existence was merely tolerated as a necessary evil.


In Sigcau v Sigcau,4 the Appellate Division held that the individual person was the owner of
the royal family home and not merely the controller of the property. Ndima5 puts it thus:




⬇️
MEMO CONTINUES ON THE NEXT PAGE……⬇️ ⬇️




1Van Niekerk 2001 CILSA 480.
2 Costa 1998 SAJHR 525, 534.
3 Fosi v Road Accident Fund 2008 3 SA 560 (CPD) 567.
4 Sigcau v Sigcau 1944 AD 67 79.
5 Ndima 2007 Speculum Juris 83-84.

, However, the learned Chief Justice refused to vacate his common law comfort zone,
although he was dealing with an African customary law problem. He continued to use the
same institution, which his experience of common law made him use, to describe the rights
of the defendant, in an African matter. By doing this he unwittingly committed an unforgivable
comparative law mistake, namely, looking at foreign law (African customary law) with the
eyes of his own system (common law).




Living Customary Law


Living customary law is the "law actually observed by African communities". 6 It is the
unwritten law that is passed on from generation to generation and is part of the culture and
tradition of the community.7 It evolves as the circumstances of society change. 8 However, a
change of legislation, in particular, and written law, in general, often if not always requires
legislative intervention. Ndima9 puts it as follows:


When it comes to the pervasive problem of developing African customary law, the judiciary
faces the additional challenge of determining the living version of customary law for the
community concerned. One of the injustices of the past, which our constitutional interpreters
must reject in striving to heal our historical divisions, is the distortion caused to African law
by the application of the interpretive technique of repugnancy. This method removed the
philosophical underpinnings (which the colonial officials perceived to be in conflict with
Western morality) from African customary law.


The development of the law is not only a catholic but is also an age-old world- wide
phenomenon. For instance, according to Hahlo,10 western European marriage law developed
in three stages. During the first stage, marriage was a private matter between spouses and
their families. During the second stage, marriage was under the jurisdiction of the church.
During the last stage, marriage passed under the control of the state. The court, in Rolfes,
Nebel and Co v Zweigenhaft,11 said:




6 Mabena v Letsoalo 1998 2 SA 1068 (T) 1074.
7 Du Plessis Introduction to Law 67.
8 Koyana Customary Law 157.
9 Ndima 2007 Speculum Juris 81-82.
10 Hahlo Law of Husband and Wife 1.
11 Rolfes, Nebel and Co v Zweigenhaft 1903 TS 185 206.

Written for

Institution
Study
Course

Document information

Uploaded on
October 2, 2022
Number of pages
23
Written in
2022/2023
Type
Exam (elaborations)
Contains
Questions & answers

Subjects

$4.87
Get access to the full document:

Wrong document? Swap it for free Within 14 days of purchase and before downloading, you can choose a different document. You can simply spend the amount again.
Written by students who passed
Immediately available after payment
Read online or as PDF

Get to know the seller
Seller avatar
biriamoraa07

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
biriamoraa07 Exam
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
8
Member since
3 year
Number of followers
5
Documents
235
Last sold
1 month ago

0.0

0 reviews

5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0

Trending documents

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their tests and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can instantly pick a different document that better fits what you're looking for.

Pay as you like, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions