RRLLB81
Assignment 2 RESEARCH REPORT Semester 1 2026
Due Date: April 2026
Interpretation of statutes: is textual interpretation of statute more useful than
contextual interpretation?
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
Terms of use
+27 81 278 3372 By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 81 278 3372
Interpretation of statutes: is textual interpretation of statute more useful than
contextual interpretation?
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
SCHOOL OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
SUPERVISOR: PROF MM MONYAKANE
RRLLB81 ASSESSMENT 2 / FINAL PORTFOLIO
(DUE DATE: April 2026)
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 81 278 3372
Abstract
This research examines whether textual interpretation or contextual interpretation of
statutes is better suited to the South African legal system. Traditionally, courts relied on
textual interpretation, which focuses on the literal meaning of statutory words to determine
the intention of the legislature. However, South Africa’s constitutional democracy has
shifted interpretative approaches toward contextual and purposive interpretation. This
study analyses statutory interpretation within the framework of the Constitution of the
Republic of South Africa, 1996, relevant legislation, and key judicial decisions. Cases such
as Jaga v Donges, Engels v Allied Chemical Manufacturers (Pty) Ltd, and Minister of Land
Affairs v Slamdien illustrate how courts consider both textual wording and broader context
when interpreting statutes. The research finds that contextual interpretation is generally
more appropriate in South Africa because it aligns legislation with constitutional values,
promotes justice, and ensures that statutes are interpreted within their social and historical
context. The study concludes that while textual interpretation remains important,
contextual interpretation better supports constitutional supremacy and the protection of
fundamental rights.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
Assignment 2 RESEARCH REPORT Semester 1 2026
Due Date: April 2026
Interpretation of statutes: is textual interpretation of statute more useful than
contextual interpretation?
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
Terms of use
+27 81 278 3372 By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 81 278 3372
Interpretation of statutes: is textual interpretation of statute more useful than
contextual interpretation?
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
SCHOOL OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
SUPERVISOR: PROF MM MONYAKANE
RRLLB81 ASSESSMENT 2 / FINAL PORTFOLIO
(DUE DATE: April 2026)
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 81 278 3372
Abstract
This research examines whether textual interpretation or contextual interpretation of
statutes is better suited to the South African legal system. Traditionally, courts relied on
textual interpretation, which focuses on the literal meaning of statutory words to determine
the intention of the legislature. However, South Africa’s constitutional democracy has
shifted interpretative approaches toward contextual and purposive interpretation. This
study analyses statutory interpretation within the framework of the Constitution of the
Republic of South Africa, 1996, relevant legislation, and key judicial decisions. Cases such
as Jaga v Donges, Engels v Allied Chemical Manufacturers (Pty) Ltd, and Minister of Land
Affairs v Slamdien illustrate how courts consider both textual wording and broader context
when interpreting statutes. The research finds that contextual interpretation is generally
more appropriate in South Africa because it aligns legislation with constitutional values,
promotes justice, and ensures that statutes are interpreted within their social and historical
context. The study concludes that while textual interpretation remains important,
contextual interpretation better supports constitutional supremacy and the protection of
fundamental rights.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
