Exam (elaborations)
LCP4804 PORTFOLIO MEMO -Advanced Indigenous Law
- Institution
- University Of South Africa
LCP4804 PORTFOLIO MEMO -Advanced Indigenous Law
[Show more]
Content preview
LCP4804 PORTFOLIOMEMO -Advanced
Indigenous Law
2022-2023
,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 forvalidity. Mogoro J, in
Du Plessis v De Klerk1, 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 rightsof 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.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Studiespro. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R223,67. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
72042 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now