Abstract
LL.M. (International Commercial Law)
The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association that consists of 53 independent and
sovereign states, most of which are former British colonies or dependencies of these colonies.1
South Africa and Australia are two examples of such commonwealth countries, South Africa
having its law rooted in Roman-Dutch law, English common law and customary law, as well as
Australia, whose laws are also greatly influenced by the English legal system.2 Brazil, on the
other hand, is an example of a civil law system.
This paper seeks to offer an analytical comparison on the different approaches that these
common law and civil law countries follow when faced with the doctrine of renvoi, a doctrine, as
will be discussed below, that applies when a court is faced with a conflict of law and must
consider the law of another state.3
The essay will journey into the different stances that South Africa, Australia and Brazil take
when confronted with the doctrine. Australia, as a common law jurisdiction, accepts renvoi, this
position will be made clear. Brazil is a civil law jurisdiction with an equally clear stance to
renvoi, it does not accept the doctrine. South Africa, as a mixed jurisdiction, lacks authority on
renvoi and consequently has an unclear stance to the doctrine. Since both South Africa and
Australia are influenced by English common law, a discussion of English case law may be
necessary to illustrate the different renvoi approaches, and, in turn, may provide guidance for
future application of renvoi by South African and Australian courts...