Distinguish between privilege and other categories of evidence, such as previous consistent statements, similar fact evidence, character evidence, opinion evidence and
hearsay.
(b) Distinguish privilege from evidentiary rules with regard to competence and compellability.
(c) Explain legal professional privilege in detail in terms of:
1. Requirements for operation of this privilege.
2. History of and rationale for this privilege, as articulated in S v Safatsa 1988 (1) SA
(A) and Bennet v Minister of Safety & Security 2009 (2) SACR 17 (SCA).
3. Who can claim this privilege.
4. Scope of this privilege (Bogoshi v Van Vuuren 1996 (1) SA 785 (A).
5. The principles governing waiver of this privilege.
(d) Be able to argue the extent to which other professional privileges should or should not be recognised.
(e) Know the principles governing collision between legal professional privilege and constitutional rights, as articulated in Jeeva v Receiver of Revenue, Port Elizabeth 1995
(f) Be able to explain litigation privilege in detail in terms of:
i. Nature of this privilege.
ii. Rationale for this privilege.
iii. Requirements of this privilege.
(g) Know and understand the contents of Schwikkard & Mosaka: Chapter 10 (pages 133 to 175) read with State Privilege: Chapter 11 (pages 177 to 202
