SUPPLEMENTARY/AEGROTAT
EXAMINATIONS – 2013
FACULTY OF
COMMERCE, ADMINISTRATION AND LAW
DEPARTMENT OF
LAW
LPLP101 – LAW
OF PERSONS
DURATION: 3 HOURS MARKS: 100
Internal
Examiner(s)
Mrs. L Ramaccio Calvino
Moderator
Dr. D Iyer
INSTRUCTION
TO CANDIDATES
- Please
ascertain that this paper have 4 pages inclusive of the cover page.
- You
may start with any question, provided the question is numbered correctly
and clearly.
- Answer
each question on a new page.
- Neat
writing will be to your advantage.
- When
answering problem scenarios questions, please ensure that your legal
opinion includes an introduction and conclusion. In addition each new
thought should be expressed in a new paragraph.
- Reference
to authority (legislation and/or case law) is important in substantiating
your answers.
Question 1:
Maradeth and Derek are life
partners. They decided to make use of a surrogacy
agency, Baby Inc. to find a
suitable surrogate mother. Mrs. Lexi Grey, a director of Baby
Inc. guaranteed that their
surrogate mothers are all medically fit to give birth to healthy
babies.
Derek’s sperm and
Maradeth’s ova were harvested and artificially fertilised. Dr.
Montgomery attended to
implant the fertilise eggs into Arizona, the surrogate mother.
One month later Maradeth
and Derek received confirmation that they were going to
have twins.
During the second trimester
of the pregnancy, Arizona was involved in a vehicle
accident. Shortly after the
accident Dr. Montgomery performed an ultra sound on
Arizona and noticed that
one of the twins was developing a breathing problem. Dr.
Montgomery informed
Maradeth and Derek that due to the injury sustained during the
accident, one of the twins
will not be able to live a normal life. Dr. Montgomery
suggested that blood tests
be performed to confirm his prognosis. Arizona however
refused to give her consent
to draw blood from her or the unborn babies and threatened
to terminate the pregnancy
if Maradeth and Derek were going to insist on blood tests.
During the third trimester
of the pregnancy Arizona had to undergo an emergency
operation after the twin
with the lung injury, showed signs of distress. During the
emergency delivery it was
discovered that the babies were conjoined twins as their two
bodies fused at the pelvic
bone, resulting in them sharing a pelvis. At birth the twin with
the lung injury stopped
breathing for 2 minutes. Luckily, Dr. Montgomery managed to
resuscitate (revive) him by
using a respirator. The twins were immediately separated
after delivery.
Dr. Montgomery indicated
that Baby Inc. should have scanned Arizona for addiction
problems, as he discovered
that Arizona was using non prescribed drugs during the
pregnancy that probably
contributed towards the twins being born as conjoined
twins. After being accused
of the aforementioned, Arizona decided that she wanted to
cancel the surrogacy
agreement.
Derek, a manic depressant, disappeared
shortly after the birth of the twins.
Answer the following questions based on the
aforementioned set of facts.
1.1 If Derek’s best friend, Mark, was setting up a business and
wanted to give co-ownership of the business to Derek’s children, could Derek
accept co-ownership of the business on behalf of their unborn children? (10)
1.2 If
Derek committed murder whilst domiciled in RSA and he then flees to Nigeria and
does not intend to return RSA, is he domiciled in RSA or Nigeria? Substantiate
your answer. (10)
1.3. Based on the aforementioned set of fats, what is the
presumption regarding paternity and how can such presumption be rebutted? (10)
1.4.1 If Arizona was a single woman that had a
child as a result of artificial fertilisation, would the child be born from
married or unmarried parents? Substantiate your answer with reference to case
law. (10)
1.4.2 Would the answer to question 1.4.1 differ if
Arizona co-habitated with Susan, another woman? (5)
1.4.3 Would your answer to question 1.4.1 differ if
Arizona was married to Susan?
(5)
1.5 Discuss the provisions of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005 that
deal with parental responsibilities and rights of unmarried fathers. (10)
1.6 Critically discuss whether the protection of the interest of
the Nasciturus implies that an unborn
child is sometimes a legal subject with reference to case law.
(10)
Question 2:
Jill is a minor. She enters
into a marriage with John, without obtain the necessary
consent. Jill furthermore
signed an antenuptial contract in terms whereof the
matrimonial property regime
excluded the accrual system. Discuss whether the
aforesaid marriage is a
valid, voidable or void marriage and the matrimonial property
consequences of such
marriage with reference to case law and legislation. (10)
Question 3:
Ben is 17 years old. He
concludes a contract with Mrs Shabangu, an adult, to buy a
second-hand computer for R3
500. Ben brings Mrs Shabangu under the false
impression that he is 18
years old by producing a forged identity document. Ben pays a
deposit of R350 and Mrs
Shabangu delivers the computer to him. Ben now refuses to
pay the remainder of the
contract price on the ground that he is a minor and therefore
not liable in terms of the
contract.
3.1 A minor who makes a misrepresentation (like Ben did in this
question) commits a
delict and can therefore be
held delictual liable. This means that the prejudiced
party has a claim for
damages against the person committing the delict (the
minor). What are the
requirements for delictual liability in these circumstances?
(5)
3.2 Can Ben recover his deposit? Briefly explain your answer with
reference to
authority. (5)
Question 4:
Briefly
explain how the following diverse factor/s may affect a person’s legal
capacity:
4.1 A person that is a declared prodigal
enters into a hire-purchase contract?
(5)
4.2 A
person kills another person whilst driving a vehicle under the influence of
alcohol. (5)
THE END
No comments:
Post a Comment