How not to protect a South Africanowned investment abroad: "Van Abo v Government of the RSA and Others"
This article considers a series of cases between Von Abo and the Government of the Republic of South Africa reported as follows: Von Abo v Government of the Republic of South Africa & Others (2009) 2 SA 526 (T); Von Abo v President of the Republic of South Africa (2009) 10 BCLR 1052 (CC); (2009)...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa 2011-11, Vol.44 (3), p.392-407 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 407 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 392 |
container_title | The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa |
container_volume | 44 |
creator | Munyai, Phumudzo S |
description | This article considers a series of cases between Von Abo and the Government of the Republic of South Africa reported as follows: Von Abo v Government of the Republic of South Africa & Others (2009) 2 SA 526 (T); Von Abo v President of the Republic of South Africa (2009) 10 BCLR 1052 (CC); (2009) 5 SA 345 (CC); and Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Von Abo (2011) 5 SA 262 (SCA); (2011) 3 All SA 261 (SCA). These cases concerned the employment of the remedy of diplomatic protection, claimed as a right under the South African Constitution, by a South African citizen to protect his private commercial interest outside South Africa. The article observes that diplomatic protection, as of right, is a nonexistent or unsuitable remedy for an individual seeking to protect private interests in a foreign country. Other options may be useful and effective. However, the article further notes, given the exponential increase in recent years of South African-owned investments in foreign countries, particularly in other African states, that the South African government has a significant role to play in ensuring the safety and security of South African-owned investments abroad. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_jstor_primary_24027058</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24027058</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24027058</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-jstor_primary_240270583</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFycEKgkAUheFZFCTlIwQX98JoWtJOonIXZLSVUcdUcq7M3JTePon2nc3P4Zsxi3OPuwEPvQWzjWn5tHDrRV5gsUeCIygkIIReI8mCQECKL6ohrnRTCIWjkiU0apCGOqkmzzWKcg_OXSiIc4QBzjhIrb6KFVAt4ZrGIFQJl-lo46zYvBJPI-1fl2x9Ot4OidsaQp31uumEfmd-wP0dD6PNP_8A0VpBQw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>How not to protect a South Africanowned investment abroad: "Van Abo v Government of the RSA and Others"</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Munyai, Phumudzo S</creator><creatorcontrib>Munyai, Phumudzo S</creatorcontrib><description>This article considers a series of cases between Von Abo and the Government of the Republic of South Africa reported as follows: Von Abo v Government of the Republic of South Africa & Others (2009) 2 SA 526 (T); Von Abo v President of the Republic of South Africa (2009) 10 BCLR 1052 (CC); (2009) 5 SA 345 (CC); and Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Von Abo (2011) 5 SA 262 (SCA); (2011) 3 All SA 261 (SCA). These cases concerned the employment of the remedy of diplomatic protection, claimed as a right under the South African Constitution, by a South African citizen to protect his private commercial interest outside South Africa. The article observes that diplomatic protection, as of right, is a nonexistent or unsuitable remedy for an individual seeking to protect private interests in a foreign country. Other options may be useful and effective. However, the article further notes, given the exponential increase in recent years of South African-owned investments in foreign countries, particularly in other African states, that the South African government has a significant role to play in ensuring the safety and security of South African-owned investments abroad.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-4051</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN AND COMPARATIVE LAW UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA</publisher><subject>Business structures ; Citizenship ; Constitutional courts ; Court orders ; Customary international law ; Diplomacy ; Diplomatic protection ; Government ; Human rights ; International law</subject><ispartof>The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa, 2011-11, Vol.44 (3), p.392-407</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24027058$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24027058$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Munyai, Phumudzo S</creatorcontrib><title>How not to protect a South Africanowned investment abroad: "Van Abo v Government of the RSA and Others"</title><title>The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa</title><description>This article considers a series of cases between Von Abo and the Government of the Republic of South Africa reported as follows: Von Abo v Government of the Republic of South Africa & Others (2009) 2 SA 526 (T); Von Abo v President of the Republic of South Africa (2009) 10 BCLR 1052 (CC); (2009) 5 SA 345 (CC); and Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Von Abo (2011) 5 SA 262 (SCA); (2011) 3 All SA 261 (SCA). These cases concerned the employment of the remedy of diplomatic protection, claimed as a right under the South African Constitution, by a South African citizen to protect his private commercial interest outside South Africa. The article observes that diplomatic protection, as of right, is a nonexistent or unsuitable remedy for an individual seeking to protect private interests in a foreign country. Other options may be useful and effective. However, the article further notes, given the exponential increase in recent years of South African-owned investments in foreign countries, particularly in other African states, that the South African government has a significant role to play in ensuring the safety and security of South African-owned investments abroad.</description><subject>Business structures</subject><subject>Citizenship</subject><subject>Constitutional courts</subject><subject>Court orders</subject><subject>Customary international law</subject><subject>Diplomacy</subject><subject>Diplomatic protection</subject><subject>Government</subject><subject>Human rights</subject><subject>International law</subject><issn>0010-4051</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNqFycEKgkAUheFZFCTlIwQX98JoWtJOonIXZLSVUcdUcq7M3JTePon2nc3P4Zsxi3OPuwEPvQWzjWn5tHDrRV5gsUeCIygkIIReI8mCQECKL6ohrnRTCIWjkiU0apCGOqkmzzWKcg_OXSiIc4QBzjhIrb6KFVAt4ZrGIFQJl-lo46zYvBJPI-1fl2x9Ot4OidsaQp31uumEfmd-wP0dD6PNP_8A0VpBQw</recordid><startdate>20111101</startdate><enddate>20111101</enddate><creator>Munyai, Phumudzo S</creator><general>INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN AND COMPARATIVE LAW UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20111101</creationdate><title>How not to protect a South Africanowned investment abroad: "Van Abo v Government of the RSA and Others"</title><author>Munyai, Phumudzo S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-jstor_primary_240270583</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Business structures</topic><topic>Citizenship</topic><topic>Constitutional courts</topic><topic>Court orders</topic><topic>Customary international law</topic><topic>Diplomacy</topic><topic>Diplomatic protection</topic><topic>Government</topic><topic>Human rights</topic><topic>International law</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Munyai, Phumudzo S</creatorcontrib><jtitle>The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Munyai, Phumudzo S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How not to protect a South Africanowned investment abroad: "Van Abo v Government of the RSA and Others"</atitle><jtitle>The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa</jtitle><date>2011-11-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>392</spage><epage>407</epage><pages>392-407</pages><issn>0010-4051</issn><abstract>This article considers a series of cases between Von Abo and the Government of the Republic of South Africa reported as follows: Von Abo v Government of the Republic of South Africa & Others (2009) 2 SA 526 (T); Von Abo v President of the Republic of South Africa (2009) 10 BCLR 1052 (CC); (2009) 5 SA 345 (CC); and Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Von Abo (2011) 5 SA 262 (SCA); (2011) 3 All SA 261 (SCA). These cases concerned the employment of the remedy of diplomatic protection, claimed as a right under the South African Constitution, by a South African citizen to protect his private commercial interest outside South Africa. The article observes that diplomatic protection, as of right, is a nonexistent or unsuitable remedy for an individual seeking to protect private interests in a foreign country. Other options may be useful and effective. However, the article further notes, given the exponential increase in recent years of South African-owned investments in foreign countries, particularly in other African states, that the South African government has a significant role to play in ensuring the safety and security of South African-owned investments abroad.</abstract><pub>INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN AND COMPARATIVE LAW UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0010-4051 |
ispartof | The Comparative and international law journal of southern Africa, 2011-11, Vol.44 (3), p.392-407 |
issn | 0010-4051 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_jstor_primary_24027058 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; HeinOnline Law Journal Library |
subjects | Business structures Citizenship Constitutional courts Court orders Customary international law Diplomacy Diplomatic protection Government Human rights International law |
title | How not to protect a South Africanowned investment abroad: "Van Abo v Government of the RSA and Others" |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T14%3A22%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20not%20to%20protect%20a%20South%20Africanowned%20investment%20abroad:%20%22Van%20Abo%20v%20Government%20of%20the%20RSA%20and%20Others%22&rft.jtitle=The%20Comparative%20and%20international%20law%20journal%20of%20southern%20Africa&rft.au=Munyai,%20Phumudzo%20S&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=392&rft.epage=407&rft.pages=392-407&rft.issn=0010-4051&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor%3E24027058%3C/jstor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24027058&rfr_iscdi=true |