S v takaendesa 1972
Web##### S v Takaendesa 1972 (4) SA 72 ##### Volschenk v Volschenk 1946 TPD 486. Dadoo v Krugersdorp Municipality 1920 AD 530 R v Detody 1926 AD 198. Union Government v Mack 1917 AD 731 750. Seluka v Suskin & Salkow 1912 TPD 258, Sachs v Minister of Justice 1934 AD 1 WebThe possibility of examining for a globe map about which countries hold more Takaendesa on the planet, helps us plenty. By putting ourselves on the map, on a concrete nation, we …
S v takaendesa 1972
Did you know?
Web1. I n S v Takaendesa 1972 (4) SA 72 (RAD) it was held that: - “ where a statute prohibits the doing of something unless something else is done as a precedent to doing the prescribed, it is the general rule of interpretation that the provisions of the Act are obligatory and not directory.” 1. WebIt is generally accepted that the object of statutory interpretation is to arrive at the intention of Parliament or the legislature. As noted by the court in Rv Takaendesa(1972) ‘the …
WebJul 27, 2024 · The judge said” In S v Takaendesa 1972(1) ZLR 162 BEADLE CJ (as he then was) referred to “the” elementary (golden) rules on the interpretation of statutes”, and … WebName index of death index created by the California Department of Health Services, Vital Statistics Section in Sacramento. Index includes name, sex, date and place of birth, date …
WebJan 16, 2024 · Discover the world's research. 20+ million members; 135+ million publication pages; 2.3+ billion citations; Join for free. Public Full-text 1. Content uploaded by Clive … WebJul 27, 2024 · The judge said” In S v Takaendesa 1972 (1) ZLR 162 BEADLE CJ (as he then was) referred to “the” elementary (golden) rules on the interpretation of statutes”, and …
http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANWHC/2024/77.pdf
WebHe relied on S vChogugudza 1996 (1) ZLR 28 (S) where the following appears at p30 E-F): “… before the State could rely on the presumption in s 15 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, it would have to show: (a) that the accused was a public officer; (b) that in the course of his employment or in breach of his duty; cups anthropologieWeb15 S v Takaendesa 1972 (4) SA 72 (RAD). 16 Amalgated Packaging Industries v Hutt 1975 (4) 943 (A). 17 Johannesburg City Council v Arumugan 1961 (3) SA 748 (W). cups and saucers made in occupied japanWebS v Takaendesa 1972 4 SA 72: en: dc.description.citationssa: Pretorius v Minister of Defence 1981 1 SA 1174 (ZAD) en: dc.description.jurisdiction: South Africa: en Files in this item. Files Size Format View; There are no files associated with this item. This item appears in the following Collection(s) cups and utensils setWebIn summary, the purpose of the rules of construction is to discover the intention of the law-giver, and such intention should be deduced from the actual words used by the legislating body, its general plan and its objects (Lion Match Company Limited v Wessels 1946 OPD 376 at 380; S v Takaendesa 1972(4) SA 72 (RA); Van Heerden v Queen s Hotel ... easy consult hanauWebFeb 10, 2014 · as expressed in the language of the Act as a whole. In S. v Takaendesa, 1972 (4) SA 72 (RAD), I referred to the elementary rules applying to the interpretation of … easy-consultoresWeblegal status of rules of interpretation the rules of interpretation are not rules in the original sense of having binding force. the correct attitude which the cups an espresso cafe msWebIn S v. Takaendesa 1972 (1) RLR 162, Beadle CJ referred to “the elementary rules on the interpretation of statutes”, and cited, with approval, ... Thus, in S v. Masiriva 1990 (1) ZLR 373, where the court was called upon to interpret section 46(4) of the Road Traffic Act ... cups anna kendrick ukulele chords