|
''EX-TRTC United Workers Front v Premier, Eastern Cape Province''〔2010 (2) SA 114 (ECB).〕 is an important case in South African law, heard and decided in the Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho, on 25 February – 4 June 2009, respectively. T Delport (attorney) appeared for the plaintiffs, and SM Mbenenge SC (with CTS Cossie) for the defendants. The case has important implications for civil procedure in South Africa, with its determination that, although a voluntary association may, under the Uniform Rules of Court,〔Rule 14(2).〕 sue or be sued in own name, this does not confer ''locus standi'' on the association where ''locus standi'' is otherwise lacking. The court also held that whether or not an association amounts to a ''universitas'' is to be determined with reference to its nature and object and activities. A written constitution is in this regard desirable but not essential. Where the association is formed for a limited purpose, and would cease to exist once that purpose has been achieved, it lacks the object to have perpetual succession and to hold property separate from its members; it also lacks the essential element of a ''universitas''. == Facts == In an action in the High Court for damages for breach of contract, after a separation of issues, the court was asked to determine the question of the ''locus standi'' of the first plaintiff, described in the particulars as a voluntary association whose objective was "to represent its members in regard to their rights and interests emanating from their employment by and the closure of the Transkei Road Transport Corporation and to jointly institute legal proceedings to achieve" that objective. The plaintiff had no written constitution. The defendant argued that the plaintiff lacked ''locus standi'', because * it was not a ''universitas''; * it did not have a constitution; and * it did not have a direct and substantial interest in the subject-matter of the action. Conversely, the plaintiffs argued that the first plaintiff ''was'' able to sue in its own name by virtue of the provisions of rule 14(2) of the Uniform Rules of Court. (Rule 14(1) defines a "firm" as "a business, including a business carried on by () the sole proprietor thereof under a name other than his own name," while Rule 14(2) allows such a firm to sue or be sued in its own name.) 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「EX-TRTC United Workers Front v Premier, Eastern Cape Province」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|