Baartman and Others v Port Elizabeth Municipality (464/2002) [2003] ZASCA 99; 2004 (1) SA 548 (SCA) (26 September 2003)

Baartman and Others v Port Elizabeth Municipality (464/2002) [2003] ZASCA 99; 2004 (1) SA 548 (SCA) (26 September 2003)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that while the appellants' occupation of the property was unlawful, the respondent, as an organ of state, failed to demonstrate the availability of suitable alternative accommodation or land for the appellants. The court found that the factors listed in section 6(3) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act are not exhaustive, and all relevant circumstances must be considered in determining whether eviction is just and equitable. The respondent's housing programme did not provide interim relief, and there was no assurance of security of tenure at Walmer Township. The court concluded that it was not in the public...

Citation
[2003] ZASCA 99
Parties
Appellant: Cecil Baartman; Appellant: Jafta Jacobs; Appellant: Isack Levack; Appellant: Gladman Sam; Appellant: Isak Levack; Appellant: Vuyani Ndotshayisa; Appellant: Jan Levack; Appellant: Charmain Richtenburg; Appellant: Jacob Davids; Appellant: Anita van Rensburg; Appellant: Willem Afrika; Appellant: Isak Uithaler; Respondent: Port Elizabeth Municipality
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 September 2003
Case Number
464/2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Eastern Cape Local Division, High Court
Outcome
Appeal upheld; eviction application dismissed with costs.
Judges
MPATI, STREICHER, BRAND, LEWIS, MOTATA
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Right to Housing, Just and Equitable Eviction, Security of Tenure, Alternative Accommodation, Public Interest
Land and Property Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Right to Housing Just and Equitable Eviction Security of Tenure Alternative Accommodation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cecil Baartman

Appellant

Jafta Jacobs

Appellant

Isack Levack

Appellant

Gladman Sam

Appellant

Isak Levack

Appellant

Vuyani Ndotshayisa

Appellant

Jan Levack

Appellant

Charmain Richtenburg

Appellant

Jacob Davids

Appellant

Anita van Rensburg

Appellant

Willem Afrika

Appellant

Isak Uithaler

Appellant

Port Elizabeth Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Eastern Cape Local Division, High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' occupation of the property was unlawful under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998.
  2. 2 Whether the court may consider factors beyond those listed in section 6(3) of the Act when deciding if eviction is just and equitable.
  3. 3 Whether suitable alternative accommodation was available to the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that while the appellants' occupation of the property was unlawful, the respondent, as an organ of state, failed to demonstrate the availability of suitable alternative accommodation or land for the appellants. The court found that the factors listed in section 6(3) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act are not exhaustive, and all relevant circumstances must be considered in determining whether eviction is just and equitable. The respondent's housing programme did not provide interim relief, and there was no assurance of security of tenure at Walmer Township. The court concluded that it was not in the public...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; eviction application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including costs for two counsel.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with: 'The application is dismissed with costs.'