Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Promotional competitions are competitions in which prizes are awarded by lot or chance in order to promote goods or services. Due to the chance element, these competitions are often categorised as lotteries or gambling. Initially, South African legislation did not make provision for the running of promotional competitions, but this situation changed when the Lotteries Act, 1997 came into force. Currently, promotional competitions are regulated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2008 (CPA). This thesis examines the regulation of promotional competitions in South Africa. It commences with a background discussion, which touches on the relevant terminology and some sociological aspects. It then considers the consequences of gambling and the need for and nature of regulation, and deals with the marketing and consumer protection contexts. This is followed by a brief overview of the global and South African history of gambling, lotteries and promotional competitions, which includes a discussion of South African case law. Foreign law relating to promotional competitions in New Zealand and Great Britain is explored in order to compare this to the South African position. This is followed by an examination of the current regulation of promotional competitions in South Africa, including a discussion regarding the interplay between the CPA and the Lotteries Act and a detailed analysis of the CPA’s provisions. The self-regulation of promotional competitions is discussed as well. The concluding chapter of this thesis contains recommended solutions for the problems identified in the analysis of the relevant legislation.

Anonim ortaklıklar hukuku prensipleri çerçevesinde sermaye koyma taahhüdünü yerine getiren pay sahiplerinin ortaklıktan çıkarılmalarını sağlamak kural olarak mümkün değildir. 6102 sayılı TTK ile söz konusu prensibe iki önemli istisna getirilmiştir. Bunlardan ilki birleşme yoluyla ortaklıktan çıkarma (TTK md.141/2), diğeri ise hâkim şirketin azınlığın paylarını satın alma hakkıdır (TTK md.208). Satın alma hakkına ilişkin TTK md.208 hükmünün kaleme alınmasında, mukayeseli hukuktaki düzenlemelerden etkilendiği görülen yasa koyucu tarafından, Türk şirketler hukuku doktrini ve uygulamasının özellik arz eden yönlerini de dikkate alınmış ve neticede kendine özgü bir satın alma hakkı düzenlemesi ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Under the principles of the law of joint stock companies, it is not, at least in principle, possible to squeeze out the shareholders who had fulfilled their capital subcription. However, Turkish Commercial Code nr.6102 (TTK) contains two significant exceptions to this principle. These exceptions are: squeeze-out merger (TTK article 141/2) and the squeeze-out right of the controlling company (TTK article 208). Turkish legislator, considering the important aspects of the doctrine and practice of Turkish companies law and under the influence of the regulations in the comparative law, made a sui generis regulation of squeeze-out right in the article 208 of the Turkish Commercial Code.

With the introduction of the National Water Act 36 of 1998 (NWA) in South Africa’s water regulatory regime, the foundations of the country’s existing water law system changed fundamentally. The NWA was promulgated with the primary aim to reform the law relating to water resources. The preamble to the NWA states that water is “a scarce natural resource that belongs to all people.” Section 3 of the NWA continues along similar lines and stipulates that all water use rights fall under the centralised control of the state or public trustee to inter alia improve the distribution, management, use, conservation and equality of access to this scarce resource. Statutory transformation of this nature has inevitable and important legal implications. It has for example been argued that the changed system has brought about a reallocation and redefinition of property rights to natural resources; a transformation which will inevitably impact the nature, form, extent, limits and protection of access and use rights that can be acquired in water as a natural resource. In an effort to understand the extent of the legal transformation brought about by the concept of public trusteeship, this thesis considers the impact of the concept in the broader South African water law context. The concept of public trusteeship is a novel concept in South African jurisprudence, without established links to existing principles of law. This thesis subsequently focuses on how and to what extent the German property law concept of őffentliche Sache may inform the development and interpretation of the South African concept of public trusteeship as entrenched in the NWA. Consequently, this thesis commences with an exposition of information on the idea of property and the relevance and importance of the different property rights regimes against which both the South African and German property regimes can be evaluated. This is followed by a description of the South African property rights paradigm and its different property concepts. The research introduces a novel take on the discussion of the regulation of rights in natural resources in South Africa, namely a “stewardship ethic of public trusteeship”. As a stewardship ethic could potentially influence the regulation of property in natural resources and even perhaps the property regime within which water as natural resource is regulated in South Africa, the next section of the research proceeds with a historical account of the South African water law dispensation. Although the historical review indicates that the concept of public trusteeship is not part of South Africa’s common law heritage, some of its principles find application in the common law concept of res publicae. The conclusion is that the concept of public trusteeship does not merely (re-) introduce the res publicae concept into the South African water realm. The concept of public trusteeship is a novel concept that was statutorily introduced into the South African water regulatory framework in terms whereof “ownership” of water resources vests in the national government, and are consequently administered on behalf of the nation and generations yet to come. A separate section of the research analyses and contextualises the concept of őffentliche Sache as it functions in German law to offer new insight into the implications that the statutorily introduced concept of public trusteeship might have on water as property and the property regime within which water is regulated in South Africa. This guides the study to the next section of the research, which illustrates that the concept of őffentliche Sache is at the basis of the German water regulatory framework. The conclusion of the study proposes an understanding of the concept of public trusteeship in South Africa based on lessons learned from the German concept of őffentliche Sache.

Arbitration provides speedy mode of settlement of disputes between the parties. In the course of arbitration, the arbitration tribunal has an obligation to give a fair opportunity to the parties to present their case. The fair hearing or due process of law in arbitration requires that both parties must be treated equally and given opportunity to be heard, which include a party may request the other party for production of documents, which are relevant to the case. Hence, the international arbitration rules contained the provisions to order a party, on its own or on the request of a party, to produce the documents relevant to the outcome of the case. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, any denial of this opportunity may be considered as a violation of due process of law, consequently a party may challenge the enforcement of the award.

تناولت هذه الدراسة أهم عنصر من عناصر عملية التحكيم، ألا وهو دور المحكم في خصومة التحكيم، وذلك من خلال معرفة شروط وإجراءات اختاره ومركزه القانوني وسلطاته والتزاماته . و قد بدأت الدراسة بمقدمة تضمنت العناصر الرئيسية للبحث وتناولنا ف الفصل الأول التعريف بالمحكم من خلال بيان معناه وتميزه عن القاضي والخبير والمصالح والوكيل، كذلك بيان الشروط الواجب توافرها في المحكم، كما تم توضيح المركز القانوني للمحكم في خصومة التحكم وكذا بيان طرق تشكيل هيئة التحكيم. كما تناولنا سلطات المحكم، سواء كانت ناشئة عن اتفاق التحكيم، أم المخولة له بموجب القانون، وبيان الالتزامات المرمية على عاتقه أثناء مباشرته لمهمته، وكل ذلك من خلال الفصل الثاني. ومن أهم النتائج التي خلصت إليها الدراسة، هي أن المحكم يتمتع بسلطات واسعة في خصومة التحكيم، إلا أن هذه السلطات الواسعة ليست مطلقة بلا قيود، وإنما يفرض على المحكم عدة التزامات منذ قبوله مهمة التحكيم وحتى صدور الحكم الفاصل في النزاع مرورا بالتزاماته أثناء سير الاجراءات مع مراعاة احترام المبادئ الأساسية للتقاضي. Cette étude portait sur l'élément le plus important du processus d'arbitrage, à savoir le rôle d'arbitre dans l'arbitrage des différends, et grâce à la connaissance des conditions et des procédures choisies statut juridique, pouvoirs et obligations. L'étude a commencé par une introduction comprenait les principaux éléments de la recherche et nous traitée dans le premier arbitre de définition de chapitre à travers les moyens de déclaration et de le distinguer du juge et expert, des intérêts et de l'agent, ainsi que la déclaration des conditions à remplir par l'arbitre, a également clarifier le statut juridique d'un arbitre dans le contrôle des différends, ainsi qu'une description des moyens de la formation du tribunal. Comme nous approchions les autorités de l'arbitre, que ce soit en raison de la convention d'arbitrage, ou qui lui sont conférés en vertu de la loi, et la déclaration des obligations jetées sur lui-même pendant l'exécution de leur mission, et tout au long du deuxième trimestre. Parmi les résultats les plus importants de l'étude, il est que l'arbitre dispose de larges pouvoirs à l'arbitrage des différends, mais ces larges pouvoirs est pas absolue, sans restrictions, mais a imposé à l'arbitre plusieurs engagements depuis accepter la tâche d'arbitrage et jusqu'à la délivrance de l'arbitre décisif dans le conflit par ses obligations au cours de la procédure, avec en tenant compte du respect des principes de base du litige