Tentamen (uitwerkingen)
FUR2601 MCQ EXAM PACK 2023
- Vak
- Instelling
latest questions and elaborate answers
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 179 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 179 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
gesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
AnnaWilliams
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
FUR2601 MCQ EXAM PACK2023
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
For assignment help and inquiries
Email: smartwritingcompany@gmail.com
WhatsApp: +254704997747
, TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 MEMORANDUM FOR COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS
1.1 First compulsory assignment
1.2 Second compulsory assignment
2 CONCLUSION
Dear Student
This tutorial letter contains the memorandum for the first and second compulsory assignments.
1 MEMORANDUM FOR COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS
1.1 FIRST COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENT
For the first assignment, you were required to select the correct answer.
1. In the substantive stage of Bill of Rights litigation, the onus is first on the respondent, who
must show that he/she infringed the applicant’s rights.
1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must show that an
infringement of a right has taken place.
2) True, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the respondent, who must show that
he/she infringed the applicant’s rights.
3) False, in the substantive stage the onus is on the respondent to indicate that the applicant’s
rights can be limited.
4) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is on the applicant, to show that the infringement is
not justifiable in terms of section 36 of the Constitution.
Answer: 1) False, in the substantive stage, the onus is first on the applicant, who must
show that an infringement of a right has taken place.
2
, FUR2601/201
2. Section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are specifically excluded from
the protection of the rights in the Bill of Rights.
1) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution excludes juristic persons from the protection of the
rights in the Bill of Rights because of the nature of these rights and the nature of juristic
persons.
2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are entitled to the rights in
the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the nature of the juristic person.
3) True, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that only natural persons can lay claim to the
rights in the Bill of Rights.
4) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that all juristic persons are entitled to all the
rights in the Bill of Rights.
Answer: 2) False, section 8(4) of the Constitution provides that juristic persons are
entitled to the rights in the Bill of Rights dependant on the nature of the right and the
nature of the juristic person.
3. Section 39 of the Constitution, the interpretation clause, provides that any court, tribunal or
forum, when interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider
foreign law.
1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when
interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider foreign law.
2) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum when
interpreting the Bill of Rights, may consider international law and must consider foreign law.
3) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum should only
consider national law when interpreting the rights in the Bill of Rights.
4) True, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum, when
interpreting the Bill of Rights may consider international law and must consider foreign law,
however, only as far as it pertains to matters of state security.
Answer: 1) False, section 39 of the Constitution provides that any court, tribunal or forum
when interpreting the Bill of Rights, must consider international law and may consider
foreign law.
4. In Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
“appropriate relief” referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief
in the event of a constitutional rights violation.
3
, 1) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
“appropriate relief” referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief
in the event of a constitutional rights violation.
2) False, in Ferreira v Levin the Constitutional Court found that the term “appropriate relief”
referred to a declaration of invalidity that would be the only applicable relief in the event of a
constitutional rights violation.
3) True, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that the term
appropriate relief referred to a declaration of invalidity as a discretionary remedy in the event of
a constitutional rights violation.
4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found that it was left
to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular circumstances.
Answer: 4) False, in Fose v Minister of Safety and Security the Constitutional Court found
that it was left to the courts to decide what appropriate relief would be in any particular
circumstances.
5. In Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg the Constitutional Court found that the right to water did
not require the state to provide every person with sufficient water on demand.
1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy was a
reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.
2) False, the Constitutional Court found that every citizen has the right to unlimited clean water.
3) True, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water can be restricted if municipalities
struggle to source clean water.
4) False, the Constitutional Court found that the right to water could reasonably be restricted to
2 litres of water per person per day.
Answer: 1) True, the Constitutional Court found that that the city's free basic water policy
was a reasonable measure of achieving the progressive realisation of the right to water.
1.2 SECOND COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENT
Question
Ms Ithabeleng Selebalo is interested in running as an independent candidate in the upcoming
national elections. According to the Electoral Act 73 of 1998, adult citizens may be elected to
the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures only through their membership of political
parties.
4
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper AnnaWilliams. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,21. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 80796 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen