Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 194
  1. #11
    User Marius@Jizni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Centurion
    Posts
    628

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    I seem to recall confiscation without compensation being mentioned in previous discussions.

    How will this case impact the concept of property ownership in South Africa as a whole? Is there a risk that this can set a precedent for larger issues?

  2. #12
    User
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Strand
    Age
    38
    Posts
    10,408

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Marius@Jizni View Post
    I seem to recall confiscation without compensation being mentioned in previous discussions.

    How will this case impact the concept of property ownership in South Africa as a whole? Is there a risk that this can set a precedent for larger issues?
    This is exactly what I am personally worried about.

  3. #13
    User Paul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    on the edge of the gene pool, playing with an open container of HTH
    Posts
    15,614

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Marius@Jizni View Post
    I seem to recall confiscation without compensation being mentioned in previous discussions.

    How will this case impact the concept of property ownership in South Africa as a whole? Is there a risk that this can set a precedent for larger issues?
    Winna winna chicken dinner!
    "Always remember to pillage before you burn"
    Unknown Barbarian

  4. #14
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Centurion
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,962

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul View Post
    Winna winna chicken dinner!
    PUBG much

  5. #15

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Paul, as I understand it, only Hunters is really a respondent currently, maybe Fidelity and Dealers Association being the other 2 that were told to put their cases behind the Hunters bid? Or was that only for the last round?
    GOSA coming into it as a supporter of Dealers Association last time?
    How has this now changed? I assume for GOSA to be part of it themselves, they will need to apply and be granted status? Which would be a good thing. Just would like a bit more detail on the parties currently involved and the plan if we bring in more.

  6. #16

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Hi Guys.
    Don't forget that the ANC has now made it 'policy' for land appropriation without compensation.
    It's all a part of 'the thin edge of the wedge'.
    Watch this space and the GOSA Facebook pages as 'the horror' (apologies to Joseph Conrad) unfolds .
    Regards.
    Keith.

  7. #17

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Manservant View Post
    This is exactly what I am personally worried about.
    When the State takes over custodianship of property it is not expropriation.

    Confused?

    Me too, but that's the Con Court for you. Said so in the mineral rights case. Expropriation without compensation is not something which scares the ConCourt.

  8. #18

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Manservant View Post
    This is exactly what I am personally worried about.
    When the State takes over custodianship of property it is not expropriation.

    Confused?

    Me too, but that's the Con Court for you. Said so in the mineral rights case. Expropriation without compensation is not something which scares the ConCourt.

  9. #19
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Edenvale
    Age
    54
    Posts
    843

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Hi guys. I have just read SAPS’ heads of argument.

    Unfortunately in my opinion their arguments are very difficult to counter. In my view the Concourt will only address the very narrow issues before it ie. the constitutionality of the relevant sections and not the issues concerning CFR inefficiencies and whether the licencing philosophy of the FCA is correct or not as GOSA is trying to argue on the coat-tails of the SA Hunters case.

    I think GOSA may have chosen the wrong case to push that agenda. I doubt the Concourt will entertain what GOSA wants to argue.

    GOSA’s agenda of rewriting the FCA to allow for licencing the individual and not the firearm is indeed laudable but is a fight for Parliament and not the Concourt. The courts do not make policy decisions. They merely interpret existing legislation and pronounce on its constitutionality. Only Parliament writes legislation.

    This case is also not about pro gun v anti gun. The Concourt will not deal with such issues.

    It can also not be argued that the sections in the FCA are unconstitutional because of CFR maladministration. Indeed SAPS concede they have poor administration but it is irrelevant regarding how the FCA must be interpreted.

    So, in conclusion, I don’t believe the Concourt will entertain GOSA’s arguments (unless GOSA has cogent arguments on the constitutionality of the relevant sections) and will not entertain the other issues since they are irrelevant.

    Ultimately, I think SAPS will win the appeal.

    I hope I’m wrong.....

  10. #20
    User
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Strand
    Age
    38
    Posts
    10,408

    Default Re: The ConCourt battle on 8 February. Important!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by GK21 View Post
    Hi guys. I have just read SAPS’ heads of argument.

    Unfortunately in my opinion their arguments are very difficult to counter. In my view the Concourt will only address the very narrow issues before it ie. the constitutionality of the relevant sections and not the issues concerning CFR inefficiencies and whether the licencing philosophy of the FCA is correct or not as GOSA is trying to argue on the coat-tails of the SA Hunters case.

    I think GOSA may have chosen the wrong case to push that agenda. I doubt the Concourt will entertain what GOSA wants to argue.

    GOSA’s agenda of rewriting the FCA to allow for licencing the individual and not the firearm is indeed laudable but is a fight for Parliament and not the Concourt. The courts do not make policy decisions. They merely interpret existing legislation and pronounce on its constitutionality. Only Parliament writes legislation.

    This case is also not about pro gun v anti gun. The Concourt will not deal with such issues.

    It can also not be argued that the sections in the FCA are unconstitutional because of CFR maladministration. Indeed SAPS concede they have poor administration but it is irrelevant regarding how the FCA must be interpreted.

    So, in conclusion, I don’t believe the Concourt will entertain GOSA’s arguments (unless GOSA has cogent arguments on the constitutionality of the relevant sections) and will not entertain the other issues since they are irrelevant.

    Ultimately, I think SAPS will win the appeal.

    I hope I’m wrong.....
    A couple of lawyers are in disagreement with you about the above...

Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •