https://ir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/2978 2026-05-05T16:09:00Z https://ir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/32398 Selected legal aspects of money-laundering control in trade-finance instruments Makuyana, Tsanangurai The traditional perception that trade-finance instruments are less susceptible to the risk of money laundering has changed due to the increasing threat of trade-based money laundering (TBML). In the process of facilitating trade-finance transactions, financial institutions may be entrapped in the dangers of TBML and be abused for criminal gains. In this regard, the institutions play a significant role in ensuring that only legitimate trade is facilitated through trade finance without being tainted by TBML. Despite that, vulnerabilities for the vice have been discovered in the trade-finance sector. This study employs a macro-comparative approach in examining how selected jurisdictions respond to the problem of TBML in trade-finance instruments. It analyses the vulnerabilities of documentary credits, documentary collections, demand guarantees and standby letters of credit to the potential risk of TBML. The thesis compares the response of the South African AML regime with that of the English, the US and Singapore AML regimes to the threat of TBML in the selected trade-finance instruments. The study reveals, inter alia, that there is not much difference between the South African AML regime and the AML regimes of the comparative jurisdictions in terms of the legislative response to the challenge of TBML in trade-finance transactions. However, the difference is apparent when it comes to the varied institutional responses to the problem within the jurisdictions considered in this thesis. While South African AML authorities have not made any official pronouncement against TBML in trade finance, those from other comparative jurisdictions have done so. The latter have also gone a step further to produce best practice reports on TBML for banks and other financial institutions involved in trade-finance transactions to enable the institutions to prepare for the challenge. However, similar to the South African position, there has not been any legislative change in the comparative jurisdictions to provide for TBML in specific terms. This means that these jurisdictions also deal with TBML using current AML legislation, which was designed originally for cash-based money-laundering operations. Therefore, the institutions and laws under the South African AML regime are relevant in the combatting of TBML. However, they may require some modifications to appropriately counter the challenge. The study makes various policy and best practice recommendations to strengthen the South African AML regime against TBML in trade-finance transactions. 2024-08-07T00:00:00Z https://ir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/32357 A comparative legal study of the derivative action in South Africa, Ghana and Australia Jennifer Owusu-Akyaw The derivative action, as practised in many jurisdictions worldwide, is a remedy by which a shareholder in a company (generally a minority shareholder) institutes legal action to protect the rights and interests of the company. Under the predominantly English law-based common law in South Africa, Ghana and Australia, the company is deemed a separate entity independent of all its stakeholders, which can sue and be sued in its corporate name. Decision-making within the company generally takes the form of a majority decision by the company’s shareholders. The minority shareholders are consequently subject to the decisions of the majority shareholders and the company’s directors. The courts are generally reluctant to interfere in the internal management of companies. This, therefore, offers restricted protection to the company and minority shareholder rights where the majority shareholders decline to act against the company’s wrongdoers on behalf of the company, or where the majority shareholders or directors are themselves the wrongdoers. The common-law derivative action is a remedy by which a shareholder in the company (generally a minority shareholder(s)) may institute legal proceedings to protect the rights and interests of the company. The common-law derivative action has several flaws. It has been plagued by uncertainty, procedural weaknesses, and the high cost of litigation. As a result, a number of leading jurisdictions, including South Africa, Ghana and Australia have revised their legal rules relating to the derivative action. Section 165 of the Companies Act 2008 is frequently referred to as South Africa’s statutory derivative action and has completely replaced the common-law derivative action and the derivative action under section 266 of the Companies Act 1973. Although there have been important court judgments clarifying the key features of section 165 of the Companies Act 2008, certain weaknesses can still be identified under the section. Ghana for a long time depended on the common-law derivative action with its attendant flaws, vagueness, procedural irregularities, and uncertainties. However, on 2 August 2019, the Companies Act 2019 was passed which specifically provides for a statutory derivative action in terms of sections 201 to 204. The Ghanaian statutory derivative action is relatively new in comparison with that of South Africa and Australia. Before 2000, the Australian derivative action had traditionally been enforced in terms of the common law. The Corporations Act 2001 in Part 2F.1A under sections 236 to 242 finally provided for a statutory derivative action in Australia. It came into force on 13 March 2000 through the promulgation of the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program Act 1999 (CLERP Act 1999). This thesis examines the statutory derivative action under South African, Ghanaian and Australian company law. The thesis will highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the South African statutory derivation action in section 165 of the Companies Act 2008 in comparison with the strengths and weaknesses of section 201 of the Companies Act 2019 and sections 236 to 242 of the Corporations Act 2001. The purpose is to identify important lessons that South Africa, Ghana and Australia can learn from each other to resolve their weaknesses. The thesis provides recommendations for each of the three jurisdictions. The recommendations will be based on the important lessons that can be learned from the key features of the laws of each jurisdiction.; Die afgeleide aksie, soos dit in baie jurisdiksies wêreldwyd beoefen word, is 'n remedie waardeur 'n aandeelhouer in 'n maatskappy (gewoonlik 'n minderheidsaandeelhouer) regstappe instel om die regte en belange van die maatskappy te beskerm. Ingevolge die oorwegend Engelse regsgebaseerde gemenereg in Suid-Afrika, Ghana en Australië, word die maatskappy as 'n afsonderlike entiteit onafhanklik van al sy belanghebbendes beskou, wat in sy korporatiewe naam kan dagvaar en gedagvaar word. Besluitneming binne die maatskappy neem gewoonlik die vorm aan van 'n meerderheidsbesluit deur die maatskappy se aandeelhouers. Die minderheidsaandeelhouers is gevolglik onderhewig aan die besluite van die meerderheidsaandeelhouers en die maatskappy se direkteure. Die howe is oor die algemeen huiwerig om in te meng in die interne bestuur van maatskappye. Dit bied dus beperkte beskerming aan die maatskappy en minderheidsaandeelhouerregte waar die meerderheidsaandeelhouers weier om namens die maatskappy teen die maatskappy se oortreders op te tree, of waar die meerderheidsaandeelhouers of direkteure self die oortreders is. Die gemeenregtelike afgeleide aksie is 'n remedie waardeur 'n aandeelhouer in die maatskappy (gewoonlik 'n minderheidsaandeelhouer(s)) regstappe kan instel om die regte en belange van die maatskappy te beskerm. Die gemeenregtelike afgeleide aksie het verskeie gebreke. Dit word geteister deur onsekerheid, prosedurele swakhede en die hoë koste van litigasie. Gevolglik het 'n aantal toonaangewende jurisdiksies, insluitend Suid-Afrika, Ghana en Australië, hul regsreëls met betrekking tot die afgeleide aksie hersien. Artikel 165 van die Maatskappywet 2008 word gereeld na verwys as Suid-Afrika se statutêre afgeleide aksie en het die gemeenregtelike afgeleide aksie en die afgeleide aksie kragtens artikel 266 van die Maatskappywet 1973 heeltemal vervang. Alhoewel daar belangrike hofuitsprake was wat die belangrikste kenmerke van artikel 165 van die Maatskappywet 2008 verduidelik het, kan sekere swakhede steeds onder die artikel geïdentifiseer word. Ghana was lank afhanklik van die gemeenregtelike afgeleide aksie met sy gepaardgaande gebreke, vaagheid, prosedurele onreëlmatighede en onsekerhede. Maar, op 2 Augustus 2019 is die Maatskappywet 2019 aangeneem, wat spesifiek voorsiening maak vir 'n statutêre afgeleide aksie ingevolge artikels 201 tot 204. Die Ghanese statutêre afgeleide aksie is relatief nuut in vergelyking met dié van Suid-Afrika en Australië. Voor 2000 is die Australiese afgeleide aksie tradisioneel afgedwing ingevolge die gemenereg. Die Korporasiewet 2001 in Deel 2F.1A onder artikels 236 tot 242 het uiteindelik voorsiening gemaak vir 'n statutêre afgeleide aksie in Australië. Dit het op 13 Maart 2000 in werking getree deur die promulgering van die Korporatiewe Reg Ekonomiese Hervormingsprogramwet 1999 (CLERP-wet 1999). Hierdie tesis ondersoek die statutêre afgeleide aksie onder Suid-Afrikaanse, Ghanese en Australiese maatskappyreg. Die tesis sal die sterk- en swakpunte van die Suid-Afrikaanse statutêre afleidingsaksie in artikel 165 van die Maatskappywet 2008 uitlig in vergelyking met die sterk- en swakpunte van artikel 201 van die Maatskappywet 2019 en artikels 236 tot 242 van die Korporasiewet 2001. Die doel is om belangrike lesse te identifiseer wat Suid-Afrika, Ghana en Australië by mekaar kan leer om hul swakpunte op te los. Die tesis verskaf aanbevelings vir elk van die drie jurisdiksies. Die aanbevelings sal gebaseer wees op die belangrike lesse wat geleer kan word uit die sleutelkenmerke van die wette van elke jurisdiksie. Summary in English and Afrikaans 2025-11-01T00:00:00Z https://ir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/31922 Aspects of substantial compliance and strict compliance as applied to demand guarantees Sikobi, Nkanyiso Demand guarantees are essential for purposes of commerce and are used to secure the performance of the contractor. South African courts have held that demand guarantees are akin to letters of credit. Despite the independent nature of demand guarantees to the underlying contract, in circumstances where the beneficiary has made a fraudulent claim, the guarantor may dishonour the demand or claim. South African courts have indicated that if the underlying contract is illegal, courts may intervene by granting an interdict to stop payment under the guarantee. The South African law recognises traditional guarantees (often called suretyship) where the beneficiary, when making a demand or claim, must demonstrate liability on the part of the contractor. There are instances where courts have held that guarantees were of a nature akin to suretyship. In South Africa, parties entering into a demand guarantee contract are subject to the common law of contract. The Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees, adopted by the International Chamber of Commerce, are only applied by explicit reference in the demand guarantee failing which such rules do not apply. Non-implementation of these rules has resulted in rigorous litigation in the recent years on this subject-matter. A demand must be supported by documents and require strict conformity. However, strict compliance with the prerequisites of the demand guarantee has not been applied consistently in South Africa. South African courts have recently been applying substantial compliance, in certain circumstances finding that a term in a guarantee is just directory and not obligatory. Furthermore, on many occasions, courts have deviated from strict compliance holding that a term in a guarantee does not make commercial sense thus such term is not mandatory. In this way, courts apply the most business-sensible interpretation when interpreting demand guarantees. 2024-02-23T00:00:00Z https://ir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/31801 The role and liability of internet service providers in South Africa : a critical and comparative appraisal Nameka, Celeste Zara This research uses a comparative approach to explore the role and liability of internet service providers in South Africa. The research aims to analyse and compare the role and liability of internet service providers for crimes and civil infractions committed by content providers and/or internet users. Against this aim, the researcher argues that internet service providers, as intermediaries, are ideally placed to monitor and control illicit content provision and/or internet use by the end user. The research focuses on South Africa, China, Ireland, and Nigeria. The research interrogated legislative control and queried the fitness for purpose of these mechanisms for internet service providers and the lacunae created by a rapidly expanding digital world comparatively. The research points out recurrent controversial and problematic concerns that affect both the internet service provider and the consumer. The researcher further explores challenges in applying legal imperatives to internet service providers that affect their end users. The comparative analysis assists in indicating how internet service providers operate in practice and their control (or lack thereof) by various legal frameworks. The researcher makes recommendations and offers solutions to assist with the future role and development of internet service providers and their impact on the end-user and criminal justice system.; Patlisiso ena e sebelisa mokhoa o hlokolosi le oa papiso ho hlahloba karolo le boikarabello ba bafani ba litšebeletso tsa inthanete Afrika Boroa. Boithuto bona bo ikemiselitse ho sekaseka le ho bapisa karolo le boikarabello ba bafani ba litšebeletso tsa inthanete bakeng sa litlolo tsa molao (kapa litlolo tse ling tsa sechaba) tse entsoeng ke bafani ba litaba le/kapa basebelisi ba inthanete. Khahlanong le sepheo sena, mofuputsi o pheha khang ea hore bafani ba litšebeletso tsa marang-rang, e le bakena-lipakeng, ba behiloe ka nepo ho beha leihlo le ho laola phano ea litaba tse seng molaong le/kapa tšebeliso ea inthanete ke mosebelisi oa ho qetela. Patlisiso e shebane le Afrika Boroa, China, Ireland le Nigeria. Patlisiso e botsitse taolo ea molao mme e botsitse ho tšoaneleha molemong oa mekhoa ena bakeng sa bafani ba lits'ebeletso tsa marang-rang le lacunae e entsoeng ke lefatše la dijithale le ntseng le hola ka potlako. Patlisiso e supa likhang tse etsahalang khafetsa le mathata a amang mofani oa litšebeletso tsa inthanete le moreki. Mofuputsi o tsoela pele ho hlahloba liphephetso mabapi le ho sebelisa litlhokahalo tsa molao ho bafani ba litšebeletso tsa inthanete tse amang basebelisi ba bona ba ho qetela. Tlhahlobo ea papiso ea libaka tse fapaneng e thusa ho bonts'a hore na bafani ba litšebeletso tsa marang-rang ba sebetsa joang le taolo ea bona (kapa khaello ea eona) ka mekhoa e fapaneng ea molao. Mofuputsi o etsa likhothaletso le ho fana ka litharollo ho thusa ka karolo le nts'etsopele ea nako e tlang ea bafani ba litšebeletso tsa inthanete le phello ea bona tsamaisong ea toka ea mosebelisi le ea botlokotsebe.; Lolu cwaningo lusebenzisa indlela ebucayi neqhathaniswayo ukuhlola indima nesibopho sabahlinzeki bezinsizakalo ze-inthanethi eNingizimu Afrika. Ucwaningo luhlose ukuhlaziya ngokujulile futhi kuqhathanise indima nesibopho sezomthetho sabahlinzeki besevisi ye-inthanethi ngobugebengu (noma ezinye iziphambeko zomphakathi) ezenziwa abahlinzeki bokuqukethwe kanye/noma abasebenzisi be-inthanethi. Ngokumelene nale nhloso, umcwaningi uphikisa ngokuthi abahlinzeki besevisi ye-inthanethi, njengabalamuli, babekwe ngokufanelekile ukuqapha nokulawula ukunikezwa kokuqukethwe okungekho emthethweni kanye/noma ukusetshenziswa kwe-inthanethi ngumsebenzisi wokugcina. Ucwaningo lugxile eNingizimu Afrika, eChina, e-Ireland naseNigeria. Ucwaningo lwaphenya ukulawulwa komthetho futhi lwabuza ukufaneleka kwenhloso yalezi zindlela zabahlinzeki besevisi ye-inthanethi kanye ne-lacunae edalwe umhlaba wedijithali okhula ngokushesha. Ucwaningo luveza ukukhathazeka okuphindelelayo okuyimpikiswano kanye nezinkinga ezithinta kokubili umhlinzeki wesevisi ye-inthanethi kanye nomthengi. Umcwaningi uphinde ahlole izinselele ekusebenziseni izimfuneko ezingokomthetho kubahlinzeki besevisi ye-inthanethi abathinta abasebenzisi babo bokugcina. Ukuhlaziywa okuqhathanisayo kwezindawo ezahlukene kusiza ekuboniseni ukuthi abahlinzeki besevisi ye-inthanethi basebenza kanjani kanye nokulawula kwabo (noma ukuntuleka kwakho) ngezinhlaka zezomthetho ezihlukahlukene. Umcwaningi wenza izincomo futhi unikeza izixazululo zokusiza ngendima yesikhathi esizayo nokuthuthukiswa kwabahlinzeki besevisi ye-inthanethi kanye nomthelela wabo ohlelweni lwezobulungiswa bobugebengu obungabasebenzisi bokugcina. Abstracts in English, Sotho and Zulu 2024-08-31T00:00:00Z