| dc.contributor.advisor | 
Van Der Merwe, D. P. 
 | 
 | 
| dc.contributor.author | 
Kock, Wynand Louw 
 | 
 | 
| dc.date.accessioned | 
2015-01-23T04:24:53Z | 
 | 
| dc.date.available | 
2015-01-23T04:24:53Z | 
 | 
| dc.date.issued | 
1996-09 | 
en | 
| dc.identifier.citation | 
Kock, Wynand Louw (1996) Hoorsê : 'n waardebepaling van die uitwerking van die 1988 wetgewing, University of South Africa, Pretoria, <http://hdl.handle.net/10500/17110> | 
en | 
| dc.identifier.uri | 
http://hdl.handle.net/10500/17110 | 
 | 
| dc.description | 
Summaries in English and Afrikaans | 
 | 
| dc.description | 
Text in Afrikaans | 
 | 
| dc.description.abstract | 
Until 1988, hearsay-evidence in our legal system was governed by common 
law.  During this period resistance developed regarding the practice that hearsay which complied 
with certain exceptions could indeed  be allowed. Case law excluded further exceptions being added.
Legislation was enacted in 1988 in which hearsay was defined, a total exclusionary rule retained,  
but the Courts given a wide discretion to allow hearsay. Via  this  legislation a more accommodating  stance  towards hearsay was introduced.
This dissertation aimed at measuring whether  the legislation achieved its objectives and consisted of analysing case law and interviewing Judges and Advocates.
The  conclusion  arrived  at  is  that  the  legislation  has  only  marginally changed  the usage 
of hearsay in our legal system. The major obstacle lies in the attitude of practitioners who 
continue to distrust hearsay and do not utilize the mechanism provided by statute. | 
 | 
| dc.description.abstract | 
Tot en met 1988, is hoorse-getuienis in ons regstelsel gemeenregtelik  beheer.  In 
die tydperk bet besware egter geleidelik ontwikkel veral oor die gekunstelde wyse waarop hoorsê   
as  aan  bepaalde uitsonderings voldoen is wel  toegelaat is. Regspraak het voorts ook bepaal dat geen verdere  uitsonderings toegevoeg kon word nie.
In 1988  is wetgewing uitgevaardig  waarin  hoorsê-getuienis  omskryf word,  'n algehele 
uitsluitingsreel behou word maar aan die howe 'n wye diskresie verleen word om na oorweging van 
voorgeskrewe faktore, hoorsê  wei toe te laat.   Die oogmerk van hierdie wetgewing was om 'n 
meganisme daar te stel om soos by die civil regstelsels en sekere ander Iande, 'n meer toeskietlike 
houding jeens hoorsê te bewerkstellig.
Hierdie verhandeling se hoofdoel was om te bepaal of die wetgewing in die doel geslaag bet.  Om tot 
'n bevinding te kom is regspraak ontleed, en is onderhoude gevoer beide met Regters en die 
Advokatuur.
Die slotsom bereik dui daarop dat die wetgewing maar weinig verander bet in die gebruikmaking  van 
hoorse-getuienis  in ons regstelsel.   Wat die wetgewing self betref,  hoewel daar sekere  besware 
te make is oor sekere  bepalings, verskaf dit tog 'n bruikbare  instrument.   Die grootste 
struikelblok is gelee in die instelling van die praktisyns wat bly  vasklou aan 'n gevestigde vrees 
vir hoarse en nie gebruikmaak  van die nuwe geleentheid  nou deur die wetgewing daargestel  nie. | 
af | 
| dc.format.extent | 
1 online resource ([6], 44 leaves) | 
en | 
| dc.subject | 
Traditional approach | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Testimonailly | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Circumstantiality | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Common law exceptions | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Total exclusion | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Wide discretion | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Probative value | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Assertion-orientated | 
 | 
| dc.subject | 
Depend upon | 
 | 
| dc.subject.ddc | 
347.64068 | 
en | 
| dc.subject.lcsh | 
Evidence, Hearsay -- South Africa | 
en | 
| dc.subject.lcsh | 
Evidence (Law) -- South Africa | 
en | 
| dc.title | 
Hoorsê : 'n waardebepaling van die uitwerking van die 1988 wetgewing | 
af | 
| dc.description.department | 
Law | 
 | 
| dc.description.degree | 
LL.M. | 
en |