To Wonderland Through the Looking-glass: Conceiving a Critical Legal Argument for Contractual Justice in the South African Law of Contract †

The aim of this paper is to identify the possible substructure (looking glass/es) of a critical legal argument for contractual justice (Wonderland) in the South African law of contract. South African contract law still fails, ten years after the constitutional transformation, to reflect the constitutional ideals of freedom, equality and human dignity in an acceptable manner. I argue that this disposition places a question mark over the legitimacy of contract law and marginalizes opportunities for the social change envisaged by the Constitution. The paper explores Duncan Kennedy’s Form and Substance-argument and indicates that the reluctance to accommodate these values may be attributable to the fact that the majority of role-players position themselves on the individualism/rules side of Kennedy’s continuum – a paradigm that perceives the law of contract as a body of positivistic rules to be applied neutrally and regardless of the social or socio-economic distortions its application may generate. In an attempt to move away from this traditional approach, the privileged paradigm is criticised. A typical CLS-approach is followed which employs sociology, psychological jurisprudence and game theory to criticise the law from outside the restrictive realms of law itself. Simultaneously, I attempt to illuminate the argument for a shift (step through the looking glass) to another paradigm. I conclude that our judiciary finds itself in a position similar to that of Plato’s prisoners in the cave and will not reach the point where they apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice. Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. †Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice.     

Resignifications and subversive transformations: Judith Butler’s queer theory and women who kill

This article provides an empirical study of a number of cases dealing with women who kill their abusive partners and the construction of the battered woman syndrome in order to identity the possibilities for transformation within the legal system. Drawing upon the work of Judith Butler, the article will argue that the unstable nature of social terms and the nature of social power provides the potential for resignifying and subversively transforming the gender identities constructed and perpetuated by the law. In addition to outlining the defences for murder and engaging in a close examination of the cases, the article will also provide a critical analysis of Judith Butler’s approach to subject formation. Dr Anna Carline LLB (Hons), LLM, PhD. Law Lecturer, Liverpool John Moores University.     

环境权:一种新兴的现代人权

人权是最基本的权利,环境权来自人权。生存权位于人权的核心,而环境权作为一项基本人权是不可剥夺、不可放弃和替代的权利。如果没有环境权,传统人权体系中的生存权就不可能得到完善的保障。环境权源于生存权,但超越了生存权,因此它是一种新兴的现代人权。     

常人方法学理论探析

社会学理论总是试图清晰地描述并解释社会行动及由此产生的复杂的生活世界 ,在熟知的基础上达到真知。传统的结构功能主义范式在这方面建立了较为完整的分析框架 ;而 5 0年代产生于美国的常人方法学理论则对结构功能主义理论进行了全方位的批判 ,并在“权宜性行动”、“索引性”、“反身性”等概念基础上建立了独特的社会学理论和分析方法。常人方法学为我们提供了全新的研究路径 ,但是它并没有完成给自己赋予的使命。     

谁是非法讯问的受益者?--侦查讯问的博弈分析

博弈论是研究冲突对抗条件下最优决策问题的理论,将其经典模型“囚徒困境”与侦查讯问进行类比,可以建立讯问中警察与犯罪嫌疑人的博弈模型。在我国,警察和犯罪嫌疑人博弈遭到破解的主要原因是警察的合法讯问和非法讯问策略、犯罪嫌疑人的坦白和抗拒策略均存在严重的效用倒置,这也是导致警察选择非法讯问,而犯罪嫌疑人选择抗拒策略的主要原因。为倒正警察和犯罪嫌疑人策略的效用,必须建立非法口供排除规则、明确口供合法性的证明责任、完善非法讯问法律责任体系、消除认定事实对口供的依赖、提高强制措施的适用标准等。     

创新:全球化条件下中国社会主义的抉择

全球化条件下的中国,走向市场经济的背后是一种全新的革新机制。这种机制在中国过去任何的制度记忆和体验中都是前所未有的,建立这种机制的压力和经验几乎全都来自外部世界。为了适应这种全球化所导致的由内生型改革走向外生型改革的挑战,中国的社会主义理论和制度层面都进行了创新,但从进展看仍然面临从外部到内部的不平衡问题。为了迎接全球化条件下的经济市场化、政治民主化和思想文化多样化的深刻挑战,当代中国的社会主义必须真正着眼于长远进行理论和制度创新。     

侵权还是违约--由一则案例引起的思考

侵权责任与违约责任是两类基本的民事责任。我国《民法通则》专设“民事责任”一章 ,不仅就两类责任的共性问题作出了阐述 ,而且对两类责任分别作出了规定。然而由于民事责任的复杂性 ,民事违法行为性质的多重性 ,使这两类责任常常发生竞合。本文试图通过对一个典型案例的分析 ,揭示违约责任与侵权责任的概念及其构成要件 ,确定侵权责任与违约责任竞合的标准 ,以期对民事立法和司法实践有所贡献。     

自然资源物权配置初探

对于自然资源,需要在利用与保护之间寻找到合适的平衡点,并以法律的形式将其确定下来。通过自然资源物权配置,把以对资源的用益为目的的各种物权形态,依照法律规定的条件和方式投入市场,最大限度实现国家所有权利益。同时,规范行政主管机关职责,完善行政管理的程序法律规范,将公法上的权力和私法上的权利相分离,使行政机关的宏观管理职能与自身部门利益相脱钩。     

以人为本的人性论基础浅论

“以人为本”成为我国新的治国理念。它是我国依法治国方略的必然要求,也是三个代表重要思想的应有之义。本文试图从以人为本的人性论基础角度论述以人为本与人性理论的关系,以更好地理解以人为本的内涵。