New Economic Rights Alliance???The Big Case?

[ScottyC]

Hi everyone,

The story is on the news again today - just google "raymondt dicks" and many will come up. Reporters have been with him the last two days. The investigation is continuing. We will try and get the footage onto youtube.

[ScottyC]

I forgot to mention - we plant to be in court on November 27, but the banks are doing everything they can to delay this. Please visit www.newera.org.za for info.

[Citizen X]

I forgot to mention - we plant to be in court on November 27, but the banks are doing everything they can to delay this. Please visit www.newera.org.za for info.

A very good morning to you Scotty,
I'd like to impress upon you that I appreciate your response! I can understand that your hands are full right now! As soon as I can get some time on my hands, I'd like to demonstrate right here on TFSA exactly how problematic a Constitutional Court battle can be and point out the actual problem areas with just one CC example.
Whilst your matter may indeed have merit and its appears(prima facie and ex facie) that it's in the best interest of all South Africans, the immediate problem is apparent, collectively the banks have sufficient funds for litigation.
In a David v Goliath battle you need your wits about you! I will indeed visit the links you provided.
I find it very disturbing that in a Constitutional Democracy a jurist can be attacked alternatively robbed alternatively intimidated alternatively silenced. If there are spanners in the works that South Africa needs to know what or who these spanners are!

[Dave A]

Disturbing news indeed!

We will try and get the footage onto youtube.

That would be cool

[Darkangelyaya]

There is some footage from the infrared camera at the lawyer's house, just search for 'Midrand Police Question' on YouTube.
And please support NewEra.org.za, I am one of the Class Action Plaintiffs in their case against the Banks.

[Darkangelyaya]

Please Google 'Midrand Police Question', for footage of the actual robbery on Youtube.

[Dave A]

Oh dear - not particularly convincing of police involvement, is it.

If that's as good as it gets... I confess I'm underwhelmed.

[Blurock]

unbeknown to the group of at least 12 robbers, their entire escapade was caught on cameras hidden around the property. The footage shows what appears to be three police cars driving up and down the 600m street while the robbery takes place.

Truths, half truths and lies? Where are the police cars?

[Darkangelyaya]

Oh dear - not particularly convincing of police involvement, is it.

If that's as good as it gets... I confess I'm underwhelmed.

I am not too sure that this is the footage they described in the accounts of the robbery; it was posted by someone else. I will try to get other footage, because this just looks like a 'normal' robbery (how sad is that - that we can call this normal?).

[Darkangelyaya]

My apologies all, it seems that the footage of the robbery has not been broadcast yet; so the Youtube footage shown earlier in this thread is of unknown source.
If you are interested in the robbery, please read this link: http://www.ubuntuparty.org.za/2012/1...er-30-oct.html

[Citizen X]

The following is my opinion on this matter in my official capacity as ‘Layperson to the law,’ a capacity which I’m incidentally very proud of!

My point of departure remains intellectual curiosity( as an ordinary member of the South African public).

I will state my opinion in points, I intend to unpack the procedural aspects of this case FIRST and firstly provide my opinion on one tape recording between Raymond Dicks and Scott Colin Cundil. Ideally, I’d also like to give my opinion on each averment in the particulars of claim. Since this is a colossal task, I should be in a position to provide a layperson’s opinion to each averment in stages. This post deals only with the introductory interview and the procedural aspects.
From the outset, allow me to impress upon you that I sincerely wish Scott and Newera everything of the best!
@ Newera: summons was sued out on 19 July 2012. Since this case is at the heart of openness and transparency, I’m confident that you will be open and transparent with me as an ordinary member of the public? The defendants must have delivered their plea. Please make their plea available so that we can also see what they have to say? You made your particulars of claim publically available, there should be no reason why you do the same for the defendants plea
PLEASE?
Summary of my opinion: Start opinion:That being said, my overall opinion is that the prospects of success are slim. Even if the High Court rules in their favour, the Constitutional Court still needs to confirm their findings. The sum total of my opinion is this: Customers were not loan fictitious money, as they spent the money on properties or goods and services. You can’t physically spend fictitious money! Even if through there are technicalities involved, what if the bank puts some simple questions to you?Q Did you take out a loan with bank a? A Yes QWere you forced to take out this loan? A No Q How did you spend this money A, Oh, I drew some and spent some at Sun-city, I bought a new lounge suit, I bought a house, I gave some away to the church End opinion
1. At this stage I simply want to put things into perspective from a procedural point of view;
2. I’ll start with the first recording, one of three that I have downloaded at this stage. I think this is just introductory, background interview between Scott Colin Cundil and Raymond Dicks. It’s entitled Raymond 1A(best quality);
3. Raymond Dicks is no doubt a learned man by his own testimony in this interview. I respect this fact of simply being learned.
4. Raymond inter alia talks about the sources of our South African Law. As at today’s date our sources of law are: 1. Legislation(aka enacted texts, aka Act of Parliament, aka Statute; it is a product of the National Assembly, it as an Act number and is signed into law by the President eg Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977(as amended), 2: Case Law(stare decisis:[also known as court decisions] this is court decisions which operate on the principal of judicial precedent, higher courts bind lower courts decision); 3: Common Law( This Roman- Dutch law as influenced by English law, it’s developed by our courts, it remains in force unless a statutory position states otherwise eg. the common law position of power of attorney as at today’s date is that the same can be provided verbally, tacitly or in writing UNLESS a statutory provision states otherwise; and/or where a statute is silent about a certain matter, the court will have a look at what common law has to say on that particular matter[ our Common law originated in ancient Rome, Rome had colonies, all its colonies had to accept it’s law; so when Rome colonised most of Europe including the Nederlands, the Netherlands had to accept Rome’s law. As the Netherlands developed original Rome law, they called it Roman- Dutch Law. Now, we know the story of Jan van Riebieck and company, when the first settlers started to arrive in what was then the Cape Colony, they brought along with them, this very Roman Dutch law. This Roman Dutch law was then developed in the Cape, it was a starting point if you will. Now, we know that South Africa was at one stage a British colony, they brought with them English case law. This is why I say Common law is Roman Dutch law as influenced by English Law. We still continue to develop this Common law in South Africa. This development is on-going. After 1994, our African Customary Law also known as indigenous law has had a great influence on Common law); 4.: Custom law and 5:African Customary Law). These five(5) sourcesremain our only authoritative primary sources of law; we do have secondary sources BUT they not binding and only have persuasive value e.g. International law and University textbooks and legal books. So, if you citing a Professor of Law, his view/opinion holds persuasive value at best. If in doubt, the court can even appoint what is called ‘friends of the court(amicus curiae),’ to assist them, they can appoint for instance two leading Professors of law who wrote tons of University Textbooks to assist them;
5. International law. Here I need to be very clear! We do have ‘public international law,’ not International law(comparative law). With Public International Law, we only concerned with the relationship between states. This will by definition include the law of peace and war etc. Comparitive law(comparing law by citing case law of other countries) is NO LONGER even a LLB subject. When it was a LLB subject it was optional NOT compulsory, one chose it as an elective. Now, no university has ‘Comparitive Law,’ as a LLB subject!!! So, if Law School doesn’t even have this as a subject any longer, this can be seen as an important point of departure. Prof Wily Hosten was the first South African academic to introduce ‘Comparitive law,’ into the LLB curriculum. That was then and this is now! Think of it like this, Zimbabwe also has law, just imagine if our courts were obligated to take their laws of land reform seriously! Also think of it like this, this is not Zimbabwe, or India, or England or the USA, this is South Africa! As such, we as proud South Africans have our own law and our own way of doings thinks, why must be consider what other countries are doing? I think other countries should consider what we are doing in the area of law. I’m personally not concerned about what Mugabe and Zimbabwe are doing in their law. Their law means nothing to me, our law means everything to me!
6. The LLB curriculum does indeed have a subject called ‘Banking Law!’ It doesn’t have a subject [any-longer] called ‘comparitive law!!! The next sentiment is not intended to offend, it’s intended to entertain! Allow this poor and wandering scholar some tongue and cheek. To drive home this point of national pride, I vest your attention on the 1981 fictitious movie ‘Escape from New York,’ now we know that Snake Plisken did indeed escape from New York. I now direct your attention to Escape from LA. In this movie the bad guy Georges Corraface, who has a new age cult called ‘The Shining Path revolutionaries puts it to Snake Plisken, ‘We know you escaped from New York, BUT this is not New York, this is LA!!!” So, why can’t I as an ordinary South African remark, This is not Zimbabwe, this is South Africa???
I escaped from New York!

Bad guy: " Yes, we know you escaped from New York! BUT this is not New York, this is LA!!!"

7. The Civil Procedure
What law regulates the High Courts in South Africa? I’ll give you the long title and the short title: Long title[ Rules regulating the conduct of the proceedings of the several provincial and local divisions of the Supreme Court of South Africa]. Short tile Uniform rules of court
Action proceedings. This is called action proceedings because it involves a summons. In action proceedings there is a distinction between the pleading stage and the trial stage. During the pleading stage the plaintiff and defendant exchange various document
Combined summons: The plaintiff NewEra sued out what is called combined summons. With a combined summons the summons and the particulars of claim are intrinsically joined or linked. Further-more the combined summons calls upon the defendant(the banks) is do two things: 1: Enter an appearance(notice of intention to defend) and 2: Plea( answer paragraph by paragraph to the plaintiff’s particulars of claim i.e. either admit, deny, place in issue or confess and avoid
8. Why is combined summons used?[ Rule 17(2)(a) Uniform rules of court] The combined summons is used where the plaintiff’s claim is unliquidated. To put this in simple terms, with a liquidated demand anyone can by means of simple mathematical calculation determined the amount claimed whereas with a combined summons the amount claimed (quantum of claim) can’t be established with ease as at the time of particulars of claim. The court will make a final ruling of amount after hearing both sides. Combined summons is mostly used in actions for divorce, damages and actions associated with the National Credit Act as there are many averments in these cases.
9. The parties: The plaintiff and the defendant(In civil cases these are the parties titles change on appeal i.e. applicant, respondent)
10. The standard in civil cases: Balance of probability. This is the test the court will use, who version of events is more probable on a balance of probabilities;
11. Joinder of parties[ Rule 10(1) Uniform rules of court] Requirements: Each plaintiff must have a claim against and also must act against the very same defendant(s) in this case the defendants are the banks; AND one or more defendants must be entitled to act against the defendants in a separate action. Circumstances: The claim must depend on the same question of law and/or fact;
12. What happens after summons is sued out Certain documents such as the defendants notice of intention to defend as well as their plea(answer to plaintiffs particulars of claim must be made available to the plaintiff and registrar of High Court within a prescribed period of time( known as dies induciae);
13. Summons was sued out on 19 July 2012, it could have been served in Early August, I’m being presumptuous, let’s assume the 1 August 2012. The banks had 10 days from date of 1 August to enter an appearance(which they did), they also had 20 days after service of notice of intention to defend to serve plea on plaintiff and registrar, which they must have done. They could also also served a ‘notice of exception,’ which I suspect the banks did, i(If so Newera, please let us know?)






I intend to continue, in a next post with some more comments on the introductory interview and then to make posts on each individual averment of the Plaintiff(I think, or I hope, no promises!)

[Citizen X]

Post 2
This is still just a follow up to my previous post number . Here I still deal with the introductory interview.
Raymond Dicks makes mention of the ‘Reasonable person,’ concept of law. I honestly fail to see where or how this concept will apply anywhere in this individual case. I accept that I may be wrong, I think some simple clarification of where and how the reasonable person concept will find reference in this individual case?
The following is committed to memory! It’s not my own words! To be perfectly honest with you , I can’t recall the textbook and/or study guide where I got this from! Acknowledgement to original authors whoever you are!
Whilst the reason person is used as a test in other areas of law, it’s not used in every single civil case as a general rule. It is by and large used in the ‘Law of delict,’ in cases of gross negligence!
“The reasonable person is merely a fictitious character which the law invents to personify the objective standard of conduct which the law sets in order to determine negligence..
By reasonable man is meant an ordinary, normal, average person. In terms of case law, in Mbombela 1933 AD 269 273 the Court described the reasonable man as “the man of ordinary knowledge and intelligence. He is neither, on the one hand, an exceptionally cautious or talented person(Van As 1976 (2) SA 921 (A) 928), nor, on the other, an underdeveloped person, or somebody who recklessly takes chances.
The reasonable person accordingly finds himself somewhere between these two extremes.
The reasonable person remains an ordinary flesh and blood human being whose reactions are subject to the limitations of human nature”
Now, in latin, there was no proper term or word for reasonable person. The latin equivalent remains ‘Diligen paterfamilias or diligens bonus(which means responsible father of a house)
‘In Herschel v Mrupe 1954 (3) SA 464 (A) 490 it was stated that the concept of a bonus paterfamilias is not that of a timorous fainthearted always in trepidation lest he or others would suffer some injury. On the contrary he ventures out into the world, engages in affairs and takes reasonable chances. He take reasonable precaution to protect his person and property and expects others to do the same.’


‘In Robinson v Roseman 1964 (1) SA 701 (T) 715. In this case it was stated that the essence of negligence which depends on the care of a diligent man, requires the plaintiff to prove that (a) the defendant should have foreseen the possibility of his conduct injuring another in his person or his property and causing him patrimonial loss and (b) that the defendant failed to take reasonable steps to have guarded against such occurrence.’

‘In Union Government v National Bank of South Africa Ltd 1921 AD 121 130 Innes CJ stated “the test as to the existence of the duty of care is by our lawthe judgment of a reasonable man. Could the infliction of injury to others have been reasonably
foreseen? If so, the person whose conduct is in question must be regarded as having owed a duty to such others, whoever they might be, to take due and reasonable care to avoid such injury.’


So in essence, as an ordinary member of the public, I’m simply asking for clarification please Newera???

[Citizen X]

Dear Scotty,

I'm fairly certain that pleadings have closed. I wonder if you would please oblige me by making avialable the banks plea/exception? This is the only way we as ordinary South Africans can hear the other side of this story! Since the epicenter of your case is a lack of openess and transparency by the banks, I'm confident that you will be completeley open and transparent with me as an ordinary South African!

[Darkangelyaya]

Dear Scotty,

I'm fairly certain that pleadings have closed. I wonder if you would please oblige me by making avialable the banks plea/exception? This is the only way we as ordinary South Africans can hear the other side of this story! Since the epicenter of your case is a lack of openess and transparency by the banks, I'm confident that you will be completeley open and transparent with me as an ordinary South African!

Scotty is dealing with a personal crisis right now, he will no doubt respond as soon as he is able to!

[ScottyC]

The banks drew and exception. We amended our summons. They banks drew exception to our amended summons. Now we have to go to court to force them to reply. What can I say?