University of Cape Town

Department of Private Law

Comparative Legal History
RDL 1004H/7H
University Examinations
October/November 2010
TIME ALLOWED : TWO (2) HOURS plus 15 minutes for reading and planning. The
15 minutes reading time may be used only for reading the question paper and making
planning notes on the left-hand page or in the margin.
INSTRUCTIONS :
weighted equally.

Answer THREE out of the four questions below. All questions are

Marks : 100
___________________________________________________________
1. How did modern South African law come to incorporate Roman legal rules? You may use
a specific rule as an example, as long as you do not use the same material to answer any
of the questions below.
2.

..The form of the contract between the parties does not, therefore, determine whether a
delivery in pursuance of it passes ownership, but the form is not a negligible factor from
which no inference can be drawn. On the contrary it has considerable value because, if
the parties put their contract in the form of a sale on credit, a strong inference can be
drawn that they intended a delivery in pursuance of that contract to transfer ownership,
whereas if they put their contract in the form of a locatio operis, an equally strong
inference to the contrary can be drawn.
[Watermeyer JA at p 398 in Commissioner of Customs and Excise v Randles, Brothers
& Hudson, Ltd 1941 AD 369]
Discuss.

3.

Sempronia sells Titius a vase. It turns out that the vase is cracked and cannot hold
water. Discuss the remedies available to Titius in classical Roman law and explain how
those remedies developed.

4.

EITHER:
4.1 How English are the modern South African rules on defamation?
OR
4.2 How Roman are the modern South African rules on defamation?
END