IOS2601 - Interpretation of Statutes
Assignment 1 (Semester 2)
DUE 10 September 2025
(a) BRIEFLY PROVIDE facts of the Jaga case. (6)
ANSWER:
In Jaga v Dönges, the appellant, Jaga, was a member of the South African Indian
community who had been convicted under legislation regulating certain aspects of
municipal governance and public order. The legislation in question contained provisions
that affected the rights of individuals based on race and ethnicity. Jaga challenged the
law, arguing that the statutory language was either ambiguous or ought to be interpreted
in his favor. The case came before the Appellate Division at a time when apartheid laws
were strictly enforced, and racial classification played a central role in the application of
legislation. The majority of the court had to decide how to interpret the statute in a
context where the text could be read literally but might produce unjust results.
(b) NAME AND DISCUSS the dominant interpretive approach before 1994 as
followed by the majority in Jaga; (14)
ANSWER:
Before 1994, the dominant approach to statutory interpretation in South Africa was the
literal or formalist approach, also sometimes called the textualist approach. In Jaga v
Dönges, the majority adhered strictly to this method, emphasizing the plain, ordinary
Disclaimer:
All materials are for study assistance only. We do not condone academic dishonesty. Use at your own risk.
We are not liable for any consequences arising from misuse.
Redistribution, resale, or sharing without permission is prohibited.
Assignment 1 (Semester 2)
DUE 10 September 2025
(a) BRIEFLY PROVIDE facts of the Jaga case. (6)
ANSWER:
In Jaga v Dönges, the appellant, Jaga, was a member of the South African Indian
community who had been convicted under legislation regulating certain aspects of
municipal governance and public order. The legislation in question contained provisions
that affected the rights of individuals based on race and ethnicity. Jaga challenged the
law, arguing that the statutory language was either ambiguous or ought to be interpreted
in his favor. The case came before the Appellate Division at a time when apartheid laws
were strictly enforced, and racial classification played a central role in the application of
legislation. The majority of the court had to decide how to interpret the statute in a
context where the text could be read literally but might produce unjust results.
(b) NAME AND DISCUSS the dominant interpretive approach before 1994 as
followed by the majority in Jaga; (14)
ANSWER:
Before 1994, the dominant approach to statutory interpretation in South Africa was the
literal or formalist approach, also sometimes called the textualist approach. In Jaga v
Dönges, the majority adhered strictly to this method, emphasizing the plain, ordinary
Disclaimer:
All materials are for study assistance only. We do not condone academic dishonesty. Use at your own risk.
We are not liable for any consequences arising from misuse.
Redistribution, resale, or sharing without permission is prohibited.
