放开我们的非物质文化遗产--Khoin 诉 Jenkins,关于:天文台公民协会诉 Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust 暂时受托人案

Q3 Social Sciences
Peter Kantor
{"title":"放开我们的非物质文化遗产--Khoin 诉 Jenkins,关于:天文台公民协会诉 Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust 暂时受托人案","authors":"Peter Kantor","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a17143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This case note analyses an appeal decision (Khoin v Jenkins in Re: Observatory Civic Association v Trustees for the Time Being of the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust [2023] 1 All SA 110 (WCC)) handed down in 2022 by the Western Cape High Court, its purpose being to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the decision and to comment on possible future developments. The text of the judgment is interpreted in the light of judicial precedent, literature and domestic (South African) and international law. One of the key findings is that \"intangible heritage\" is an integral part of both domestic and international law, and the Khoin-case gives judicial recognition to the concept as a part of South African heritage law. One of the main criticisms levelled against the judgment is that it does not adhere to judicial precedent in failing to find that the right to consultation of First Nations Peoples before administrative action is taken that allegedly violates their constitutional rights to intangible heritage is sufficient to satisfy the test for the existence of a prima facie right for the purposes of obtaining an interim interdict.","PeriodicalId":55857,"journal":{"name":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hands off our Intangible Cultural Heritage - Khoin v Jenkins in re: Observatory Civic Association v Trustees for the Time Being of the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust\",\"authors\":\"Peter Kantor\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a17143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This case note analyses an appeal decision (Khoin v Jenkins in Re: Observatory Civic Association v Trustees for the Time Being of the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust [2023] 1 All SA 110 (WCC)) handed down in 2022 by the Western Cape High Court, its purpose being to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the decision and to comment on possible future developments. The text of the judgment is interpreted in the light of judicial precedent, literature and domestic (South African) and international law. One of the key findings is that \\\"intangible heritage\\\" is an integral part of both domestic and international law, and the Khoin-case gives judicial recognition to the concept as a part of South African heritage law. One of the main criticisms levelled against the judgment is that it does not adhere to judicial precedent in failing to find that the right to consultation of First Nations Peoples before administrative action is taken that allegedly violates their constitutional rights to intangible heritage is sufficient to satisfy the test for the existence of a prima facie right for the purposes of obtaining an interim interdict.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"102 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a17143\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a17143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本案例说明分析了西开普省高等法院于 2022 年作出的一项上诉判决(Khoin 诉 Jenkins in Re:Observatory Civic Association v Trustees for the Time Being of the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust [2023] 1 All SA 110 (WCC)),其目的是找出判决的优缺点,并对未来可能的发展进行评论。判决文本根据司法先例、文献以及国内法(南非)和国际法进行了解释。主要结论之一是,"非物质遗产 "是国内法和国际法的组成部分,Khoin 案使这一概念作为南非遗产法的一部分得到司法承认。对该判决提出的主要批评之一是,它没有遵守司法先例,没有认定原住民在采取行政行 动据称侵犯其非物质遗产的宪法权利之前进行磋商的权利足以满足为获得临时禁令的目 的而存在表面证据确凿的权利的检验标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hands off our Intangible Cultural Heritage - Khoin v Jenkins in re: Observatory Civic Association v Trustees for the Time Being of the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust
This case note analyses an appeal decision (Khoin v Jenkins in Re: Observatory Civic Association v Trustees for the Time Being of the Liesbeek Leisure Properties Trust [2023] 1 All SA 110 (WCC)) handed down in 2022 by the Western Cape High Court, its purpose being to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the decision and to comment on possible future developments. The text of the judgment is interpreted in the light of judicial precedent, literature and domestic (South African) and international law. One of the key findings is that "intangible heritage" is an integral part of both domestic and international law, and the Khoin-case gives judicial recognition to the concept as a part of South African heritage law. One of the main criticisms levelled against the judgment is that it does not adhere to judicial precedent in failing to find that the right to consultation of First Nations Peoples before administrative action is taken that allegedly violates their constitutional rights to intangible heritage is sufficient to satisfy the test for the existence of a prima facie right for the purposes of obtaining an interim interdict.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: PELJ/PER publishes contributions relevant to development in the South African constitutional state. This means that most contributions will concern some aspect of constitutionalism or legal development. The fact that the South African constitutional state is the focus, does not limit the content of PELJ/PER to the South African legal system, since development law and constitutionalism are excellent themes for comparative work. Contributions on any aspect or discipline of the law from any part of the world are thus welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信