Of course each case has to be tried on its own facts and merits based on the particular circumstances, but until there is absolute certainty on the matter in the form of an amendment to the relevant legislation to specifically cater for signatures of land sale agreements in this manner, or a Supreme Court of Appeal ruling confirming this stance, we strongly advise against signing any agreement for the alienation of land other than by way of the traditional wet ink on paper.
The new Property Practitioners Act provides a substantive change to the real estate market in South Africa with a bigger focus on transformation and consumer protection The Act introduces new restrictions on the conduct of ‘property practitioners’ in their interactions with consumers, including obligations relating to the display of Fidelity Fund certificates and the completion of a mandatory disclosure form In line with its transformative aims, the Act requires property practitioners to be in possession of a valid BEE certificate for them to receive Fidelity Fund certificates The Act imposes new requirements for the training of ‘candidate property practitioners’ and imposes heightened transparency in practitioners’ management of trust accounts and accounting records
We are proud to announce that Peter Turner has been promoted to Senior Associate at Dingley Marshall Lewin Inc.
Peter was admitted as an attorney in December 2012 and holds LLB and LLM (Constitutional Law) degrees obtained from the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Since his admission as an attorney, Peter has practiced mainly, although not [...]
We are receiving an increasing number of queries concerning defects in motor vehicles bought from dealers and this article summarises your rights and possible next legal steps in these circumstances. If you approach the dealer and he/she refuses to act in accordance with the CPA by repairing the vehicle or refunding you (depending on what you requested), you will need to submit a complaint against the dealer at the Motor Vehicle Ombudsman (“MIOSA”) in terms of section 82(6) of the CPA.
The outcome of this judgement is not only a good reminder of how our courts deal with matters of right to privacy versus freedom of expression, but also an important reminder for us to consider how we use social media and the internet and the way we make our own private information public.
On 21 January 2022 the CCMA delivered its findings in the unfair dismissal dispute of Mulderij v The Goldrush Group (case number: GAJB-24054-21), where it confirmed that the dismissal of an employee pursuant to a refusal to adhere to an employer’s mandatory workplace vaccination policy (“MWVP”) may be considered substantively fair.
Having documents commissioned should be a relatively simple task. In practice, however, minor mistakes, like a missed initial, can undermine the integrity of the entire process. Unfortunately, this is often only cured by returning to the commissioner of oaths and repeating the exercise. To avoid this and prevent getting caught out, we explain the basics of commissioning and some tips on preventing misfires.
M Booysen v J Dolley-Major (Case No: 5043/2021) Landmark case – Naming an alleged rapist on social media
It is important that each defamation matter be consider on its own set of facts. A defamation matter is never a clear-cut court case, and you should consider your legal routes carefully before proceeding. The case entitled M Booysen v J Dolley-Major (Case No: 5043/2021) in a landmark defamation case to consider.
The law on defamation of character is not as simple as it may sound – there are quite a few intricate parts to consider. With the use of social media in the internet-fuelled world we live in, this is even more true.