The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills?

dc.contributor.advisorBradfield, Grahamen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorBalmuth, Simon Marken_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-21T09:35:08Z
dc.date.available2015-11-21T09:35:08Z
dc.date.issued2015en_ZA
dc.description.abstractDoes the creation of a deemed servant-master relationship, between pilot and ship-owner or master through section 76 (2) of the National Ports Act (hereafter the NPA); accurately reflect the de facto relationship in which the parties stand? Can the provision's importation of the doctrine of vicarious liability and consequent foisting of liability on the ship-owner be defined as logical, just and practical? It will be argued after having had recourse to the manner in which these roles have come to be defined and understood in South African labour jurisprudence, the governing law, respective positions occupied by ship-owner and port authority, broad-based considerations of policy, and key tenets of the rationale underpinning the concept of vicarious liability; that the answer to the above-raised questions is are sounding no. In addition, the writer will submit that the privatisation of pilotage services presents a solution, alternate to the irrational imposition of the doctrine of vicarious liability, which is palatable to government, ship-owning interests and pilot. a) Introduction Typically, claims arising from consequences of pilot error satisfy the definition of a 'maritime claim' contained in s 1 (1) (e) and s 1 (1) (l) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act. As a result thereof; a South African court sitting in admiralty has jurisdiction to hear such claims. As to the identification of the appropriate law; s 6 (2) dictates that South African statute, if relevant, trumps pre-existing English admiralty law and is the law to be applied. The NPA, chiefly through sections 75 and 76, regulates the extent of the pilot's liability for his/her acts or omissions whilst a vessel is under compulsory pilotage. Thus, the Act is applicable to disputes arising from pilot error, before a South African court sitting in admiralty.en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationBalmuth, S. M. (2015). <i>The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills?</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Shipping Law Unit. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15161en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationBalmuth, Simon Mark. <i>"The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills?."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Shipping Law Unit, 2015. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15161en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationBalmuth, S. 2015. The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills?. University of Cape Town.en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Balmuth, Simon Mark AB - Does the creation of a deemed servant-master relationship, between pilot and ship-owner or master through section 76 (2) of the National Ports Act (hereafter the NPA); accurately reflect the de facto relationship in which the parties stand? Can the provision's importation of the doctrine of vicarious liability and consequent foisting of liability on the ship-owner be defined as logical, just and practical? It will be argued after having had recourse to the manner in which these roles have come to be defined and understood in South African labour jurisprudence, the governing law, respective positions occupied by ship-owner and port authority, broad-based considerations of policy, and key tenets of the rationale underpinning the concept of vicarious liability; that the answer to the above-raised questions is are sounding no. In addition, the writer will submit that the privatisation of pilotage services presents a solution, alternate to the irrational imposition of the doctrine of vicarious liability, which is palatable to government, ship-owning interests and pilot. a) Introduction Typically, claims arising from consequences of pilot error satisfy the definition of a 'maritime claim' contained in s 1 (1) (e) and s 1 (1) (l) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act. As a result thereof; a South African court sitting in admiralty has jurisdiction to hear such claims. As to the identification of the appropriate law; s 6 (2) dictates that South African statute, if relevant, trumps pre-existing English admiralty law and is the law to be applied. The NPA, chiefly through sections 75 and 76, regulates the extent of the pilot's liability for his/her acts or omissions whilst a vessel is under compulsory pilotage. Thus, the Act is applicable to disputes arising from pilot error, before a South African court sitting in admiralty. DA - 2015 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2015 T1 - The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills? TI - The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills? UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15161 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/15161
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationBalmuth SM. The privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills?. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Shipping Law Unit, 2015 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15161en_ZA
dc.language.isoengen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentShipping Law Uniten_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.subject.otherShipping Lawen_ZA
dc.titleThe privatisation of pilotage services: a panacea for South Africa’s pilotage ills?en_ZA
dc.typeMaster Thesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters
dc.type.qualificationnameLLMen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_law_2015_balmuth_simon_mark.pdf
Size:
573.77 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Collections