一个代价高昂的错误:南非历史档案信托基金诉南非储备银行

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW South African Journal on Human Rights Pub Date : 2019-07-03 DOI:10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129
Lisa Chamberlain
{"title":"一个代价高昂的错误:南非历史档案信托基金诉南非储备银行","authors":"Lisa Chamberlain","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Costs awards are never the most exciting part of a judgment, but nevertheless have enormous significance in terms of their repercussions. This is particularly so when a litigant is a community living in poverty or a non-governmental organisation (NGO) acting in the public interest. In this context, the recent judgment in South African History Archive Trust (SAHA) v South African Reserve Bank (SARB) requires examination, as it contains a costs award against SAHA that, if allowed to stand, may bankrupt the NGO. This article will therefore introduce the case, examine the existing principles applicable to costs awards arising primarily out of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and then try to understand what possible reasons might have motivated the costs award in this case.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"288 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A costly blunder: South African History Archive Trust v The South African Reserve Bank\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Chamberlain\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Costs awards are never the most exciting part of a judgment, but nevertheless have enormous significance in terms of their repercussions. This is particularly so when a litigant is a community living in poverty or a non-governmental organisation (NGO) acting in the public interest. In this context, the recent judgment in South African History Archive Trust (SAHA) v South African Reserve Bank (SARB) requires examination, as it contains a costs award against SAHA that, if allowed to stand, may bankrupt the NGO. This article will therefore introduce the case, examine the existing principles applicable to costs awards arising primarily out of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and then try to understand what possible reasons might have motivated the costs award in this case.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal on Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"288 - 297\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal on Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal on Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1663129","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

成本裁决从来不是判决中最令人兴奋的部分,但就其影响而言,却有着巨大的意义。当诉讼当事人是一个生活贫困的社区或一个为公众利益行事的非政府组织(NGO)时,情况尤其如此。在这种背景下,最近南非历史档案信托(SAHA)诉南非储备银行(SARB)的判决需要审查,因为它包含了对SAHA的费用赔偿,如果允许成立,可能会使非政府组织破产。因此,本文将介绍该案件,研究主要由宪法法院的判例产生的适用于费用裁决的现有原则,然后试图了解本案中可能产生费用裁决的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A costly blunder: South African History Archive Trust v The South African Reserve Bank
Costs awards are never the most exciting part of a judgment, but nevertheless have enormous significance in terms of their repercussions. This is particularly so when a litigant is a community living in poverty or a non-governmental organisation (NGO) acting in the public interest. In this context, the recent judgment in South African History Archive Trust (SAHA) v South African Reserve Bank (SARB) requires examination, as it contains a costs award against SAHA that, if allowed to stand, may bankrupt the NGO. This article will therefore introduce the case, examine the existing principles applicable to costs awards arising primarily out of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and then try to understand what possible reasons might have motivated the costs award in this case.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
77.80%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Consulting citizens: Addressing the deficits in participatory democracy Ubuntu, human rights and sustainable development: Lessons from the African Arbitration Academy’s Model Bilateral Investment Treaty Research handbook on economic, social and cultural rights Augmentative and alternative communication in the South African justice system: Potential and pitfalls The importance of litigating the right to access sufficient food: Equal Education v Minister of Basic Education
×
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