scholarly journals EXPERIENCES OF SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIAL WORKERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Naidoo ◽  
Madhu Kasiram
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
South African ◽  
The United Kingdom

More about Diamonds

2019 ◽  
pp. 115-119
Author(s):  
Vladimir Shubin
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
South African ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
African Studies ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Soviet State ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
De Beers

The article is a rejoinder to the work of Yury S. Skubko, previously published in the Journal of the Institute for African Studies, on Moscow’s relations with De Beers. It is based not only on the available literature but also on the author’s personal experience. The author shows that under the monopoly of this South African company in the field of diamond sales, Soviet organizations, even in the conditions of a South African boycott, were forced to deal with its subordinate structures and the attempts to sideline them were in vain. In particular the article analyses the attitude to a controversial agreement signed by the Soviet state-owned “Glavalmalmazzoloto” and De Beers Centenary in 1990, when, like in many other cases in the “Gorbachev’s era” Moscow’s principle stand was eroded for short-term results even personal gains. The author comes to the conclusion that the responsibility for Moscow’s dealings with De Beers must be borne not by our country, but above all by the United Kingdom, which allowed De Beers have the headquarters of its Central Selling Organisation (CСO) in London.

scholarly journals A Comparative Discussion of the Judicial Disqualification of Directors under the South African Companies Act

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Rehana Cassim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
South African ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
The South ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Locus Standi

Abstract Section 162 of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 empowers courts to declare directors delinquent and hence to disqualify them from office. This article compares the judicial disqualification of directors under this section with the equivalent provisions in the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America, which have all influenced the South African act. The article compares the classes of persons who have locus standi to apply to court to disqualify a director from holding office, as well as the grounds for the judicial disqualification of a director, the duration of the disqualification, the application of a prescription period and the discretion conferred on courts to disqualify directors from office. It contends that, in empowering courts to disqualify directors from holding office, section 162 of the South African Companies Act goes too far in certain respects.

Reconfiguring professional autonomy? The case of social work in the UK

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Chandler ◽  
Elisabeth Berg ◽  
Marion Ellison ◽  
Jim Barry
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Professional Autonomy ◽  
The Third ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Uk

This chapter discusses the contemporary position of social work in the United Kingdom, and in particular the challenges to what is seen as a managerial-technicist version of social work. The chapter begins with focus on the situation from the 1990s to the present day in which this version of social work takes root and flourishes. The discussion then concentrates on three different routes away from a managerial-technicist social work: the first, reconfiguring professional practice in the direction of evaluation in practice, the second ‘reclaiming social work’ on the Hackney relationship-based model and the third ‘reclaiming social work’ in a more radical, highly politicised way. Special attention is devoted to a discussion about how much autonomy the social workers have in different models, but also what kind of autonomy and for what purpose.

Home and Away. The Enlistment of Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, and South African Men in Dominion Expeditionary Forces in the United Kingdom during the Great War

Itinerario ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-58
Author(s):  
John Connor
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
South African ◽  
British Empire ◽  
Australian Government ◽  
South Africans ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Canadian Citizenship ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Great War

On the outbreak of war, men from the Dominions were scattered across the British Empire. As each Dominion began recruiting their expeditionary forces at home, the issue arose whether these expatriates, especially those resident in the United Kingdom, should join the British Army or be able to enlist in their Dominion's force. Canada and New Zealand allowed recruiting for the CEF and NZEF in the UK. Many Anglophone White South Africans joined a “colonial” battalion of the Royal Fusiliers. The Australian Government refused to allow Australians in the UK to join the AIF, despite the repeated requests of the Australian expatriate community. This paper examines the questions of British and sub-Imperial Dominion identities as well as the practical policy considerations raised by this issue. It argues that there is some evidence of nascent Dominion nationalism—the Canadian High Commission in London issued what became known as “a Certificate of Canadian Citizenship” to expatriates— but that Dominion Governments generally based their decisions on this issue based on cost and domestic political considerations.

scholarly journals Omicron: The pandemic propagator and lockdown instigator – what can be learnt from South Africa and such discoveries in future

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1126-1129
Author(s):  
Indrajit Banerjee ◽  
Jared Robinson ◽  
Indraneel Banerjee ◽  
Brijesh Sathian
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
South African ◽  
Clinical Features ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Global Community ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
New Variant ◽  
Predominant Variant ◽  
Current Point

The SARS-CoV-2 virus which causes the disease termed COVID-19 ripped through the globe in the latter part of 2019 and has left a state of fear, death and destruction in its wake. The Omicron variant was officially announced by the South African authorities on the 24th of November 2021, with the first confirmed sample of the infection being collected on the 9th of November 2021. The initial cases were flagged as a possible new variant due to the stark differences in the presentation and clinical features of the patients. At the time of Omicron’s discovery, the predominant variant circulating within South Africa was the Delta variant B.1.617.2 which typically presented with more severe and stark symptoms.  Omicron spread rapidly within the Southern African content and abroad, principally South Africa, Botswana, Hongkong and Israel were among the first countries to record cases of the new variant. The first European case of the Omicron variant was confirmed on the 26th of November 2021 in Belgium. Towards the end of November 2021 cases of the new variant had been confirmed and recorded in France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Portugal and Scotland. Additional cases of the Omicron variant have been confirmed in Canada and Australia. At this current point in the development of the Omicron upsurge in cases the international community should aim for further vaccinations among their fellow countrymen, but more so vaccine equality should be ensured. Such equality should be ensured in the developing nations as the virus does not respect any boundaries or territories and thus a higher level of vaccination worldwide will confer greater protection to the global community as a whole.

scholarly journals CONTRACTUAL CAPACITY AND THE CONFLICT OF LAWS IN COMMON-LAW JURISDICTIONS (PART 1): THE UNITED KINGDOM

Obiter ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eesa A Fredericks
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
South African ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Common

This series of two articles provides a comparative overview of the position in the common-law conflict of laws in respect of the contractual capacity of natural persons. The comparative study is undertaken in order to provide guidelines for the future development of South African private international law. Reference is primarily made to case law and the opinions of academic authors. The legal position in the law of the United Kingdom, as the mother jurisdiction in Europe, is investigated in part I. Although Scotland is a mixed civil/common-law jurisdiction, the situation in that part of the United Kingdom is also discussed.Part II will deal with the rules and principles of private international law in respect of contractual capacity in Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), North America (the common-law provinces of Canada and the United States of America), Asia (India, Malaysia and Singapore) and Africa (Ghana and Nigeria). Part II also contains a comprehensive summary of the legal position in the common-law countries, followed by ideas for the reform of South African private international law in this regard.

Conflict Resolution in Southern Africa: Why Namibia is not Another Zimbabwe

1982 ◽  
Vol 12 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 37-45
Author(s):  
David F. Gordon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
South African ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Southern Africa ◽  
The United States ◽  
West Germany ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The U.S

Despite continued American insistence that a negotiating impasse had not been reached, by the final months of 1982 it seemed clear that internationally-recognized independence for Namibia would not soon be achieved. While Washington claimed that negotiations between South Africa, Angola, and the Southwest African Peoples Organization (SWAPO) (with the U.S. as mediator) remain meaningful, there appears to have been a decisive move away from settlement. The latest round of negotiations, spearheaded by the United States as the leading element of the Western Contact Group (the U.S., the United Kingdom, France, West Germany, and Canada), has attempted to move South African-controlled Namibia to independence on the basis of Security Council Resolution 435 of September 1978.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document