This special edition consists of a selection of contemporary academic papers that were developed into full journal articles by presenters who delivered them at the Society for Law Teachers of Southern Africa (SLTSA) conference hosted by the Faculty of Law, North-West University, on 15-19 January 2024 at SunCity. These contributions were developed into articles, subjected to a rigorous double-blind peer review process to determine their quality, and subsequently accepted for publication in the Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (PELJ).

Human Rights Education (HRE) is formally integrated into South Africa's basic education curriculum, yet violence, abuse, and harassment continue to undermine effective teaching and learning. Despite the constitutional guarantees and international obligations, schools remain unsafe, exposing learners to weapons, bullying, sexual violence and community-linked crime. This gap between policy intent and lived realities raises critical concerns about the effectiveness of HRE implementation and the Department of Basic Education's role in ensuring learner safety. This study examines the extent to which weak enforcement, inadequate teacher training and limited learner engagement compromise the transformative potential of HRE. Employing a doctrinal approach, it reviews constitutional provisions, international standards, empirical evidence of school violence, and safety frameworks such as the National School Safety Framework. The findings demonstrate that the issue lies not in the absence of legal frameworks or curricular content, but in inconsistent implementation and the lack of collaboration between schools, communities and enforcement agencies. The study contributes to ongoing debates by emphasising the need to strengthen HRE delivery, enhance teacher preparedness and improve enforcement mechanisms. Providing safe schools is framed as both a constitutional duty and a prerequisite for equitable education. Future research should explore how insights derived from addressing school violence may inform employment law reforms, particularly regarding workplace safety and protections against harassment.

Section 7(3) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 counters income splitting arrangements by imputing income received by a minor child by reason of a donation, settlement or other disposition made by the minor child's donor parent to such donor parent, thereby subjecting the imputed income to the donor parent's normal tax rate. The construction of the phrase by reason of has been a point of contention in cases dealing with sub-income (income on income). The secondary literature shows disagreement on whether it is still possible to successfully argue, as was done in the past, for an interpretation of by reason of that excludes sub-income from the scope of section 7(3). In addition to this disagreement, key judgments on the imputability of sub-income were delivered in 1949 and 1955, predating the enactment of section 39(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 and the landmark judgment in Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund v Endumeni Municipality 2012 2 All SA 262 (SCA), which introduced significant shifts in the landscape of statutory interpretation. This study applies the Endumeni interpretative framework to section 7(3), with the discussion being structured around the modalities of the augmented Savignian Model. The analysis reveals that the present reliance on the Appellate Division's pre-1996 judgment in CIR v Widan is justified and therefore that sub-income may be imputed to a donor parent under section 7(3) if the parent's donation, settlement or other disposition is the effective (or proximate) cause thereof.

The outbreak of the Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) in 2019 has accelerated digital transformations particularly in the area of e-commerce. The imposition of public health-related lockdowns limited physical movement and increased the demand and use of e-commerce worldwide. While other businesses in developed countries saw the outbreak of the COVID-19 as an opportunity to expand their digital markets, in Africa, particularly in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) it highlighted the need to bridge the digital divide both within and across the region, that continues to hinder greater participation in e-commerce activities. A regulatory framework that harmonises e-commerce laws to enhance legal certainty and predictability is considered important to enable the development of e-commerce. Although the SADC Model Law on Electronic Transactions and Electronic Commerce (SADC Model Law) was adopted with the aim of harmonising e-commerce laws in the SADC region, the regulation of e-commerce in the SADC remains inadequate, fragmented and in some instances outdated. This article examines the regulation of e-commerce in the SADC and concludes that it does not support the development of e-commerce in the region. It identifies some challenges that are inhibiting the development of e-commerce and offers some solutions that might help enable the development of e-commerce in the SADC.

The right to basic education is a fundamental human right which is recognised globally for its vital role in the transformation of individuals and society in general. The right to basic education is enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution, 1999 as amended as a Directive Principle of State Policy. The right is also recognised in various international and regional instruments of which Nigeria is a signatory. However, unequal access to quality education, inadequate infrastructure and teacher shortages have continued to hamper the enjoyment of this right. The failure of the government to ensure the adequate enjoyment of this right underscores the importance to ensuring accountability of a legally enforceable right to education in Nigeria. The Legal Defense and Assistance Project (LEDAP) v Federal Ministry of Education case presents an opportunity for the courts to once again provide clarity on the nature of the right to basic education. This case marks a significant judicial intervention in the enforcement of the right to basic education as enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution, legislation and international human rights instruments. The article examines the court's interpretation of the constitutional and legislative provisions on the right to basic education, highlighting the court's rationale in affirming the justiciability of the right to basic education. Furthermore, the article examines the broader effect of the decision on the government's commitment to fulfilling its educational obligations in the Constitution and under international law, highlighting the role of the judiciary in enforcing the educational right. The paper argues that while the court's decision marks a significant step towards realising the right to basic education, there is a need for sustained advocacy and government accountability for the right to basic education to become a tangible reality for children in Nigeria.

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreed to by parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2022, commits all countries to ensure that by 2030, 30 per cent of terrestrial, inland water, coastal and marine areas are effectively and equitably conserved and managed in protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures. This is a weighty ambition given current global and domestic coverage statistics, and countries can ill afford to lose existing areas through protected areas downgrading, downsizing and degazettement (PADDD). The concept of PADDD has received growing international attention, with calls to implement an array of measures to prevent and track its prevalence. Within the South African context, studies on PADDD are few and far between, but this does not mean that events of this nature are not present. Efforts to establish a coal mine in the Mabola Protected Environment (MPE) in Mpumalanga provide a perfect example of downgrading and downsizing events in action, and the judiciary has been called upon on numerous occasions to intervene to halt these events. This note considers the most recent of these judicial interventions, namely that in Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa v MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs (1322/2021) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 48 (18 July 2024). It critically traverses the array of review grounds invoked by the applicants to set aside a decision of the relevant provincial minister to remove certain properties situated within the MPE from its borders, to facilitate the establishment of the coal mine. It reflects on several apparent frailties in the court's decision relating to most of these review grounds. It concludes by proposing certain simple legislative reforms to the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003, to improve the regulation of future PADDD events in South Africa, and thereby potentially preclude the necessity of disputes of this nature being brought before the judiciary in the future.

Traditional leadership is constitutionally entrenched in section 212 of the South African Constitution, 1996. As it is the oldest form of government in the country, there is always curiosity pertaining to matters of traditional leadership. The place of traditional leadership in a democracy, where leaders are elected, is also debatable. However, the recent events in traditional communities, including the death of certain notable traditional leaders and the legal tussles that engulfed their nations following their deaths, have sparked an interest in the law regarding the recognition of traditional leaders. This article, therefore, critically discusses the law regarding the appointment of traditional leaders. It discusses the statutory law and the customary law of hereditary succession, as well as the role of royal families in governance. It also considers some contentious issues, such as the succession of people born out of wedlock and of women into positions of traditional leadership.

The Motor Industry Ombudsman of South Africa (MIOSA) is an industry ombud recognised under the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA). The MIOSA regulates the interaction and provides for alternative dispute resolution in the automotive and related industries in South Africa. Moreover, the MIOSA is an impartial organisation that focusses on the resolution of disputes where a deadlock has been reached between the automotive and related industries and their customers, as well as relationships among participants in the automotive and related industries to the benefit of the parties. The role of the MIOSA is to make recommendations in cases referred to it where parties cannot reach common ground and are unable to arrive at mutually acceptable agreements following a dispute. This analysis explores and proffers possible solutions to address the challenges that impede the MIOSA from discharging its role and mandate under the CPA effectively in resolving consumer disputes in the South African automotive industry.

The Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA) introduced a variety of consumer rights that are intended to protect consumers in their engagement with suppliers. Amongst these rights is the consumer's right to equality in the consumer market. Section 8 of the CPA sets out practices that are considered to be prohibited discriminatory marketing practices; while section 9 of the CPA provides instances that constitute reasonable grounds for differential treatment in certain circumstances. In particular, section 9(2) of the CPA provides that a supplier may provide and designate facilities that are separate but equal for the exclusive use of each gender. Alternatively, the supplier is permitted to offer access to a facility to one gender exclusively. Over the years, the LGBTQI+ community has increased awareness around gender stereotypes; and stressed that not all persons conform to a binary-gender allocation. Therefore, the question that arises is whether section 9(2) of the CPA, in permitting the designation of facilities to exclusively one gender, is unfairly discriminating against transgender and non-binary persons and is therefore unconstitutional. To the extent that the provision is constitutional, the paper considers whether the continued practice of having gender-segregated bathrooms to the exclusion of transgender and non-binary persons is constitutional.

South African Criminal Procedure has colonial roots which are yet to be fully uprooted. While several sections of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 have been declared unconstitutional, much of the Act remains steeped in colonial legacies. Moreover, the minimum sentencing legislation, passed after democracy, also resembles the laws enforced by colonisers. This article challenges the colonial nature of the South African Criminal Procedure Regime and calls for its decolonisation. It proposes and endorses the use of ubuntu in sentencing proceedings to promote a culture of decolonisation. uBuntu is an African value which confronts the retributive and colonial nature of Criminal Procedure. The article builds on the current literature on decolonisation in South African law by focussing specifically on the decolonisation of Criminal Procedure and on how ubuntu can be adopted to assist in the process. While the Constitutional Court in Makwanyane 1995 3 SA 391 (CC) was praised for its interpretation of ubuntu in the abolition of the death penalty, subsequent criminal courts have been loath to apply it. This needs to change. The article is presented in four parts. Firstly, it looks at the concepts of colonisation, decolonisation and ubuntu. It then examines the historical colonial roots of sentencing in South Africa from 1652 up until the enactment of the Criminal Procedure Act, the current regime. Thirdly it analyses how ubuntu can be utilised and applied by presiding officers during sentencing. The study concludes by making several recommendations.