Getting Ahead of the 'Game': The Reclassification of Wild Animals Contained in Protected Areas as Res Publicae"

Inge Snyman, Frank Philip Bothma
{"title":"Getting Ahead of the 'Game': The Reclassification of Wild Animals Contained in Protected Areas as Res Publicae\"","authors":"Inge Snyman, Frank Philip Bothma","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The common law \"escape rule\" determines that if a wild animal escapes from its controlled environment and reverts to its natural state of freedom, it is res nullius and may be acquired by another party by occupatio. To place the owners of game in a more favourable position when their game escapes from its enclosure, the aforementioned common law rule was amended by the Game Theft Act 105 of 1991 (GTA). Sections of the Game Theft Act 105 of 1991 came under discussion in Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency v Medbury (Pty) Ltd (Wildlife Ranching South Africa amicus curiae) 2016 4 SA 457 (ECG) and later in Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency v Medbury (Pty) Ltd t/a Crown River Safari 2018 4 SA 206 (SCA). Two separate issues came before the courts. First, whether a certificate in terms of section 2(2)(a) of the GTA is a prerequisite for the operation of section (2)(1)(a) of the GTA; and second, whether the common law must be developed to provide that wild animals that are sufficiently contained in a protected area managed by an organ of state charged with the management thereof in terms of relevant nature conservation legislation in order to promote conservation, are res publicae owned by such organ of state. Neither one of the cases thoroughly considered the second issue before the court. Therefore, the purpose of this contribution is to investigate the possibility of developing the common law to provide that wild animals that are sufficiently contained in a protected area managed by an organ of state charged with the management thereof in terms of relevant nature conservation legislation in order to promote conservation are res publicae owned by such organ of state. In Roman Law res publicae were classified as public things that were out of commerce and intended for public use. They are often referred to as state property, but they belong to the entire civil community and their common interests in these things are safeguarded by the state. This proposed development bears some resemblance to the international environmental law principle known as the public trust doctrine. The public trust doctrine determines that a country's sovereign acts as the guardian of the public interest in natural resources by holding them in trust for the benefit of the nation as a whole. The article provides a theoretical analysis of the proposed development of the common law by exploring (a) the significance of biodiversity conservation and protected areas in South Africa; (b) the application of the GTA in the context of protected areas; (c) the concepts of res nullius, res publicae and the public trust doctrine and (d) the development of the common law in South Africa.","PeriodicalId":55857,"journal":{"name":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","volume":"93 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15848","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The common law "escape rule" determines that if a wild animal escapes from its controlled environment and reverts to its natural state of freedom, it is res nullius and may be acquired by another party by occupatio. To place the owners of game in a more favourable position when their game escapes from its enclosure, the aforementioned common law rule was amended by the Game Theft Act 105 of 1991 (GTA). Sections of the Game Theft Act 105 of 1991 came under discussion in Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency v Medbury (Pty) Ltd (Wildlife Ranching South Africa amicus curiae) 2016 4 SA 457 (ECG) and later in Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency v Medbury (Pty) Ltd t/a Crown River Safari 2018 4 SA 206 (SCA). Two separate issues came before the courts. First, whether a certificate in terms of section 2(2)(a) of the GTA is a prerequisite for the operation of section (2)(1)(a) of the GTA; and second, whether the common law must be developed to provide that wild animals that are sufficiently contained in a protected area managed by an organ of state charged with the management thereof in terms of relevant nature conservation legislation in order to promote conservation, are res publicae owned by such organ of state. Neither one of the cases thoroughly considered the second issue before the court. Therefore, the purpose of this contribution is to investigate the possibility of developing the common law to provide that wild animals that are sufficiently contained in a protected area managed by an organ of state charged with the management thereof in terms of relevant nature conservation legislation in order to promote conservation are res publicae owned by such organ of state. In Roman Law res publicae were classified as public things that were out of commerce and intended for public use. They are often referred to as state property, but they belong to the entire civil community and their common interests in these things are safeguarded by the state. This proposed development bears some resemblance to the international environmental law principle known as the public trust doctrine. The public trust doctrine determines that a country's sovereign acts as the guardian of the public interest in natural resources by holding them in trust for the benefit of the nation as a whole. The article provides a theoretical analysis of the proposed development of the common law by exploring (a) the significance of biodiversity conservation and protected areas in South Africa; (b) the application of the GTA in the context of protected areas; (c) the concepts of res nullius, res publicae and the public trust doctrine and (d) the development of the common law in South Africa.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
抢占'游戏'先机:将保护区内的野生动物重新归类为 "公共资源"
普通法中的 "逃脱规则 "规定,如果野生动物从其受控环境中逃脱并恢复其自由的自然状态,则该动物为无主物,可由另一方通过占有获得。为了使猎物的所有者在猎物逃离围栏时处于更有利的地位,1991 年的《猎物盗窃法》(GTA)对上述普通法规则进行了修订。在东开普省公园和旅游局诉梅德伯里(私人)有限公司(南非野生动物牧场法庭之友)案(2016 4 SA 457 (ECG))以及后来的东开普省公园和旅游局诉梅德伯里(私人)有限公司 t/a Crown River Safari 2018 4 SA 206 (SCA))中,对 1991 年第 105 号《猎物盗窃法》的条款进行了讨论。法院审理了两个不同的问题。首先,《一般贸易协议》第 2(2)(a)条规定的证书是否是《一般贸易协议》第(2)(1)(a)条实施的先决条件;其次,是否必须发展普通法,以规定由负责管理保护区的国家机关根据相关自然保护立法管理的保护区内的野生动物被充分控制,以促进保护工作,这些野生动物属于该国家机关所拥有的公共财产。这两起案件都没有深入考虑法院审理的第二个问题。因此,这篇论文的目的是研究发展普通法的可能性,以规定由负责管理保护区的国家机关根据相关的自然保护立法对保护区进行管理以促进保护的野生动物被充分控制在保护区内,是该国家机关所拥有的公有财产。在罗马法中,res publicae 被归类为非商业性的公共物品,供公众使用。这些物品通常被称为国家财产,但它们属于整个公民社会,他们对这些物品的共同利益受到国家的保护。这一拟议的发展与被称为公共信托原则的国际环境法原则有一些相似之处。公共信托理论认为,一个国家的主权者作为自然资源公共利益的监护人,为整个国家的利益而托管自然资源。文章通过探讨:(a) 南非生物多样性保护和保护区的意义;(b) 《一般贸易协定》在保护区方面的应用;(c) 无主物、公共物和公共信托理论的概念;(d) 南非普通法的发展,对普通法的拟议发展进行了理论分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: PELJ/PER publishes contributions relevant to development in the South African constitutional state. This means that most contributions will concern some aspect of constitutionalism or legal development. The fact that the South African constitutional state is the focus, does not limit the content of PELJ/PER to the South African legal system, since development law and constitutionalism are excellent themes for comparative work. Contributions on any aspect or discipline of the law from any part of the world are thus welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain Technologies in Online Dispute Resolution: A Solution to Consumer Disputes in South Africa? Safeguarding the Rights of Children Living in Kinship Care in South Africa "Cause of Action": How Could the Supreme Court of Appeal Get it so Wrong? Olesitse v Minister of Police (SCA) (Unreported) Case No: 470/2021 of 15 June 2022 Navigating Reputational Risks: Cautionary Considerations for South African Banks in the Unilateral Termination of Bank-Customer Relationships An Overview of the Extent of the Powers of South African Competition Authorities in the Regulation of Price Discrimination under the Competition Act 89 of 1998 in the Context of Digital Transformation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1