This article considers assertions of the diminution of the monetary sovereignty of host states when they sign bilateral investment treaties. It discusses monetary transfer provisions in the model BITs of South Africa and Egypt and how their construction can affect states’ rights to regulatory autonomy in mitigating financial crises. This has become imperative in light of recent discussions on the possibilities for a systemic overhaul of BIT provisions, by pushing back against the diminution of host states’ sovereignty in order to respond to the force of globalization. Achieving this would require reform of existing model BITs to introduce appropriate exceptions in order to ensure policy space to protect the public interest.

Higher education plays a central role in countries’ realization of their socio-economic development and in establishing a competitive, skilled workforce globally. The need for a skilled workforce, combined with scarcity in financial resources pertaining to higher education, has resulted in governments resolving to finance higher education. This article seeks to encourage adequate regulation to realize the sustainability of higher education financing in Lesotho, to achieve greater inclusiveness in institutions of higher learning. Through the National Manpower Power Development Council Act 8 of 1978, the Lesotho government established the National Manpower Development Council, which is aimed at facilitating the granting of loan bursaries from a fund administered by the National Manpower Development Secretariat. However, these efforts have faced challenges due to the increased cost of financing higher education. Poor management of the loan recovery function, increasing default by graduates on their repayment obligations and a lack of concerted efforts between the respective government departments threaten its sustainability.

Until recently, Zimbabwean insolvency law was unconcerned with rights of employees on insolvency of the employer. The new Insolvency Act points in a different direction. It guarantees limited rights of workers in their capacity as creditors and as employees. There is a convergence of insolvency law and labour law. These are legal disciplines with contradictory philosophies. This contribution analyses the rights of employees on insolvency in Zimbabwe. The review is informed by international best practices. The article establishes that Zimbabwe follows the “model two: bankruptcy preference approach”. It brings to the fore fundamental weaknesses inherent with this approach in the Zimbabwean context. The article argues that the protection of employees’ rights on insolvency can be enhanced if Zimbabwe follows the “pro-employee approach” and the “bankruptcy priority-guarantee fund approach”. It concludes by advocating for the alignment of the Insolvency Act with international best practices, the constitution and labour legislation.

This article discusses relevant Australian case law with reference to the oppressive remedy in company law. In South Africa, only shareholders who are entered in the shareholders’ register can make use of the remedy, contrary to the Australian application. The Australian case law explains the locus standi of shareholders who are not entered in the register. Reference is also made to South Africa's previous Companies Act 1973 due to the Smyth v Investec appeal court case, where the court applied the principles, relevant to an oppressive remedy under the 1973 act. In this regard, the appeal court's reasoning is compared to that of the Australian court; possible new perspectives relevant to South Africa's new Companies Act 2008 are also discussed. The Australian perspective is included to facilitate investigation of a South African court's approach to oppressive conduct concerning the narrow interpretation of “shareholder”. It is concluded that “shareholder” should also be interpreted to include a beneficial shareholder.

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.

The use of experts in the review of tax cases is recognized globally. Nigeria appears to appreciate the importance of this practice. However, several previous attempts to establish tax courts or tribunals have been frustrated due to a lack of constitutional support. In the search for a better model for Nigeria, this article examines the US and Canadian experiences of using specialized tax courts or tribunals to see what lessons Nigeria could learn. The two north American experiments justify the use of tax courts as better alternatives to what Nigeria currently has. In particular, the Canadian experience appears to be more suited to the Nigerian context. Therefore, it is argued that Nigeria's 1999 Constitution should be amended to establish a Tax Court of Nigeria, which should be recognized as a superior court of record.

Infringement of broadcasts is often treated as a crime. The Nigerian Constitution guarantees that no-one can be prosecuted for any act that is not prescribed in a written law. Section 20 of Nigeria's Copyright Act only criminalizes dealing with infringing copies. A “copy” is defined in terms of material form. An infringing broadcast therefore connotes a recorded broadcast or a copy of a broadcast. This article argues that, statutorily, not every act that gives rise to civil liability for broadcast copyright infringement constitutes a crime. The article reviews the first broadcast copyright prosecution Court of Appeal decision in Eno v Nigerian Copyright Commission. Eno was unlawfully prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned. The article seeks to stem the wave of prosecutions on the type of charges used in Eno. In the absence of law reform, the prosecutions based on the line of charges in Eno constitute a fracturing of constitutional rights.