Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The South African law of delict engages primarily with 'the circumstances in which one person can claim compensation from another for harm that has been suffered'. [1] JC Van der Walt and Rob Midgley define a delict 'in general terms [...] as a civil wrong', and more narrowly as 'wrongful and blameworthy conduct which causes harm to a person'. [2]
The case is especially important in the law of delict, dealing with the problems relating to causation and the conditio sine qua non or "but-for" test. Where there was a negligent delay in furnishing medical aid and treatment to the deceased, whose widow established, on a balance of probabilities, that he would not have died "but for" such ...
Delict deals with the righting of legal wrongs in civil law. In modern times much of the literature on delict, and most case law heard before the courts, deals with issues arising from negligence. Insofar as liability for negligent wrongdoing is concerned, the principle of liability is based on reparation for damnum injuria, or loss caused by ...
In Roman law, obligatio ex delicto is an obligation created as a result of a delict. [1] While "delict" itself was never defined by Roman jurisprudents, delicts were generally composed of injurious or otherwise illicit actions, ranging from those covered by criminal law today such as theft and robbery to those usually settled in civil disputes in modern times such as defamation, a form of ...
Tort law is referred to as the law of delict in Scots and Roman Dutch law, and resembles tort law in common law jurisdictions in that rules regarding civil liability are established primarily by precedent and theory rather than an exhaustive code. However, like other civil law jurisdictions, the underlying principles are drawn from Roman law.
The actio iniuriarum is an action for delict which "not only seeks to protect an individual's dignity and reputation but also his or her physical integrity." [ 1 ] Harm or loss
The Constitutional Court, in Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (Centre for Applied Legal Studies Intervening), an important case in South African criminal, delict and constitutional law, found that the State could be held delictually liable for damages arising out of the unlawful omissions of its servants.
Smit v Abrahams [1] is an important case in South African law.It was heard in the Appellate Division on March 15, 1994, with judgment handed down on May 16. Botha AR, EM Grosskopf AR, Kumleben AR, Van Den Heever AR and Mahomed Wn AR were the judges.