Criminal law involves a system that contains legal rules that are meant to keep the people safe and demolish wrongful conduct. Those who get on the wrong side of the law will face imprisonment, fines and other means of punishment.
This articles includes criminal penalties.
If any person is caught driving over a red light that becomes a self invitation to go to court. A fine could be issued to the driver and the driver has no choice but to pay the amount of money that is needed.
The driver could end up in jail if the driver refuses or does not show up to an assigned court date appearance.
This article includes forgery penalties.
Forgery could be the faking of documents or the using of original documents of someone else and acting like it’s yours. Penalties vary depending on the seriousness of the case. The accused is usually put straight in prison getting either the minimum or maximum sentence.
It could be 1 year, 16 months, 2/3 years or 4 years.
Judges believe that the rules followed in once case should be implemented in cases that follows that are similar to that first case, that way each case is handled fairly.
The Legal Practice Act is intended to come intended to come into operation on the 31st of October 2018. It will come into operation after chapter 2 of the act comes into operations and section 14 has been excluded. This will be happening on the same day as the 4 Statutory Provincial Law Societies are due to become abolished.
The rest of the Legal Practice Act will be implemented on the 1st of November 2018 into section 120 (4) which will repeal the Attorneys Act, 1979.
Section 94, also known as s109 (1) (bA) Regulations.
Legal Practice Act, 2014.
The acts purpose is to provide a legal platform for any changes that may occur to the legal profession that concerns the value of the Constitution. It paves an easy way to be informed about the fees of legal practitioners, required to by the community for their legal services. It creates equal opportunities for future aspirant legal practitioners.
A fit and proper person should follow the criteria of someone who shows integrity, reliability and honesty. This person should carry themselves with dignity and conduct themselves in a dignified manner as well as maintain the dignity of the court. A fit and proper person should have the capacity for hard work and have respect for the legal order.
No, the company cannot employ an attorney or advocate that has been struck off the Roll. If the company decided to do so the person who rehired the attorney or advocate will be fined or will be imprisoned, for no longer than a year.
Yes, because that means that the attorney or advocate has not been struck off the Roll yet.
The penalties include a fine, imprisonment of no longer than 2 years or both penalties at one time.
To obtain a LLB, a course study of no less than 4 years is required. To obtain a LLB through a Bachelors Degree first, a study course of no less than 5 years is required.
Cur. adv. vult It’s a Latin legal term meaning the court wishes to consider the matter, it’s a term that reserves judgement until some other day.
There was no evidence of a joint and several liability. There are no presumptions that there could have been any joint venture between the two parties. The appellant was found not liable. Although there were no presumptions of a joint venture it can be proved that both parties were aware that the particular venture was a binding one.
The appellant was successful in suing the respondent. The respondent was sued for 2,5 76 pounds with 6% interested which would start getting paid 5 months after the trial.
Involved parties were convicted on counts of murder and robbery.
Parties were sentenced to death on each counts and to long terms of imprisonment on the other counts.
The Appellate Division appealed against the convictions and sentences.
The appellate division came to conclusion that the circumstances of the murders were such that the accused should receive the heaviest sentence permissible according to law.
Makwanyane and Mchunu were convicted on two counts of murder and robbery. On each of the mentioned counts they were each sentenced to death and to long terms of imprisonment, allowing them no chance tobe able to ever leave prison. The Appellate Division represent the mentioned parties appealed against these convictions as well as the sentences. The Appellate division came to terms that the circumstances of the murders were to such an extent that the accused should receive the heaviest sentences permissible according to the law.
I am going to discuss the death penalty and whether I agree or disagree with it and also provide my reasons to support my decision.
For murders the death penalty will make them think twice about the crime they are about to commit. No one wouldn’t think twice about doing something wrong if they know that their own lives would pay the price for their wrongdoings. It would makes criminals think not just about the lives of the people they are about to hurt, but also their own. This death penalty could lead to lesser crimes, it could then lead to crime free countries. The death penalty is likely to save more lives than it takes. The death penalty is a way to prevent a crime before it happens. According to the parliament the death penalty goes against the beliefs of Christians, that believe that taking the life of a person is a sin and that was the main reason the death penalty was abolished. But crime rates sky rocketed ever since, was it a good idea to abolish the death penalty then? People don’t realize how the death penalty works wonders in countries such as Dubai. Dubai is a crime free country, because its residents know that if they do something wrong even something small such as stealing their hands will get chopped off. The idea of the death penalty might sound inhumane, but in reality it is the only solution to keep crime away.
I definitely agree that the death penalty is the perfect and acceptable punishment for certain crimes.
The court found that male primogeniture is unconstitutional. It allowed only the oldest male child or relative to receive or accept the estate of a deceased Black person. It was unfair to woman especially woman that were married in customary law it was also unfair to female children that were the oldest.
Authors Bekker and Koyana think that the Constitutional Court didn’t consider the wider context of this case. The judges seemed to be stuck on the submission of male primogeniture being unconstitutional. Bekker and Koyana believe the judges couldn’t think beyond the box.
I wholeheartedly agree with the Constitutional Court that male primogeniture is unconstitutional and unfair to woman and female children. It is mostly unfair to woman that have been married to the deceased and are deprived of the chance of receiving the estate.
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.get help with your assignment