LJU4804 May June Portfolio (ANSWERS) Semester 1 2026 - Due 21 May 2026

LJU4804 May June Portfolio (ANSWERS) Semester 1 2026 - Due 21 May 2026. Guaranteed distinction quality with trusted academic solutions, clear explanations, professional formatting, and reliable support. QUESTION 1 Instructions: Read the set of facts below and answer the questions that follow. Mr John and Mrs Lynn Mubanga got married in Mauritius while on holiday there in December 1982. A couple of weeks before this marriage, Mr Mubanga flew to the Cayman Islands to obtain a divorce from his first wife, Bertha Mubanga. At the time of entering into marriage, Mr and Mrs Lynn Mubanga were both domiciled in England, but Zambian citizens. Shortly after their marriage, Mr and Mrs Lynn Mubanga immigrated to South Africa and established a domicile in Johannesburg. Two children were born from the marriage and Mrs Lynn Mubanga stayed at home to look after the children, while Mr Mubanga worked as a chartered accountant for a large firm. In 2013, Mrs Lynn Mubanga instituted divorce proceedings against Mr Mubanga in a South African High Court. Upon institution of the divorce proceedings, Mrs Lynn Mubanga also claimed a redistribution of assets in terms of section 7(3) of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979. 1.1 Upon the institution of divorce proceedings by Mrs Lynn Mubanga, Mr Mubanga argued that the parties were never legally married, since the divorce obtained in the Cayman Islands was not valid. Before the court may proceed with adjudicating over the divorce between the parties, it needs to determine the validity of the Cayman Islands divorce. What type of incidental question did the court face? Provide a full discussion with reference to your prescribed article on this topic. (12) Assume for purposes of questions 1.2 – 1.7 that the Cayman Islands divorce order was found to be valid by the South African High Court. 1.2 Which legal system applies to the formal validity of Mr John and Mrs Lynn Mubanga’s marriage in terms of the South African rules of private international law? (2) CONFIDENTIAL LJU4804 May/June 2026 Page 7 of 9 1.3 Which legal system applies to the proprietary consequences of Mr John and Mrs Lynn Mubanga’s marriage in terms of the South African rules of private international law? (3) 1.4 Which legal system applies to divorce matters in terms of the rules of South African private international law? (2) 1.5 Advise Mrs Lynn Mubanga on her chances of success in claiming redistribution of assets in terms of section 7(3) of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979 if the court follows the approach in Esterhuizen v Esterhuizen 1999 (1) SA 492 (W)? Note: your answer should include a case discussion of this prescribed case. (13) 1.6 Mr John Mubanga executed a will in Mauritius in which he appointed Mrs Lynn Mubanga as his sole heir. At the time of execution of the will, he was domiciled in England and remained a Zambian citizen throughout his life. After his divorce from Mrs Lynn Mubanga was finalised, John executed a second will in Germany that expressly revoked his first will and appointed his children as his sole heirs. At the time of execution of the second will, he was domiciled in South Africa. John’s first will was formally valid only in terms of Mauritian law. John’s second will was formally invalid in terms of all its possible testing systems, but formally valid in terms of Mauritian law. In terms of the rules of intestate succession of Mauritius, Germany and South Africa, his children would be his intestate heirs. John died in a motor vehicle accident in Namibia during October 2025 while he was still domiciled in South Africa. Based on the facts above, advise on who would inherit John’s estate? Note: In your answer, you must apply the relevant provision of the Wills Act 7 of 1953. (5) 1.7) The motor vehicle accident that led to Mr John Mubanga’s death was caused by an unroadworthy truck when the driver lost control of the vehicle outside Windhoek, Namibia. The truck is owned by a company that has its principal place of business in Johannesburg, South Africa. The executors of Mr Mubanga’s estate wish to institute a delictual claim against the owner of the truck. According to the principles of South African private international law of delict, which legal system should be applied to the delictual claim? (Note: refer to the latest case law authority without providing a full case discussion) (3) [40] CONFIDENTIAL LJU4804 May/June 2026 Page 8 of 9 QUESTION 2: Consider the information in the paragraph below and provide a properly referenced essay-answer. It is a well-known fact that international commercial arbitration is the preferred dispute settlement method for international commercial disputes. Discuss whether the current South African arbitral regime provides an effective framework for conducting arbitrations in the Republic where the lex arbitri (the law of the seat of arbitration, which is the law applicable to the procedural aspects of the arbitration) is South African law. Instructions: - Make use of numbered headings and sub-headings and provide footnote references for every statement made. - From a content perspective, consult chapter 2 of the International Arbitration Act 15 of 2017 and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (incorporated as Schedule I to the Act). [20] QUESTION 3: Instructions: Read the set of facts and answer the questions that follow. Sun Rays (Pty) Ltd is a company incorporated in South Africa with its central administration and principal place of business in Johannesburg. Sun Rays imports solar inverters and sells them to solar companies across South Africa. Sunny (Pty) Ltd is a company incorporated in Australia with its central administration and principal place of business in Sydney. Sunny (Pty) Ltd exports solar inverters worldwide. Sun Rays (Pty) Ltd and Sunny (Pty) Ltd concluded an international sales contract in terms of which Sun Rays (Pty) Ltd purchased a large consignment of solar inverters for the purchase price of 1 million Australian Dollars. Payment had to be made by means of a letter of credit. The goods had to be shipped FOB (Sydney). The contract contained no choice of law clause. The goods were delivered to Sun Rays’ place of business. They failed to make payment. Sunny instituted a claim against Sun Rays in a South African High Court. 3.1 How would the court determine the proper law of the contract if the objective approach to determining the applicable law is employed? Explain the theory with CONFIDENTIAL LJU4804 May/June 2026 Page 9 of 9 relevant case law references and apply the theory to the facts of the question. Note: Also refer to the prescribed article by Eesa Fredericks, ‘The Proper Law of a Documentary Letter of Credit (Part 1)’ (2003) SA Merc LJ 63. (10) 3.2 Explain what the FOB INCOTERM entails. Note: Your discussion must be based on your prescribed reading material by Van Niekerk and Schulze. (5) 3.3 Assume for purposes of this sub-question that the court finds Australian law to be the proper law of the contract. Australia is a CISG contracting state. Should the CISG be applied? Note: refer to the prescribed article: Marlene Wethmar-Lemmer, ‘When could a South African court be expected to apply the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)?’ (2008) De Jure 419. (5) [20]