Daniels and Others v M and Y Tombstone Granite Works (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC161/2022) [2023] ZALCC 19 (23 March 2023)

Daniels and Others v M and Y Tombstone Granite Works (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC161/2022) [2023] ZALCC 19 (23 March 2023)

The court found that the applicants' residence was demolished without a court order, in contravention of both the Constitution and ESTA. The respondent, as the person in charge, was aware of the pending eviction application and should not have demolished the house or evicted the applicants without judicial sanction. The alternative accommodation provided was not suitable, failing to meet the statutory definition and the reasonable needs of the applicants. The court exercised its discretion to condone the late filing of the answering affidavit but emphasized the importance of respecting court directives and the rule of law. Restoration of residence on the original property was not feasible...

Citation
[2023] ZALCC 19
Parties
Applicant: Lorraine Daniels; Applicant: Gavin Daniels; Applicant: Lindsay Britton; Applicant: Lorrentia Daniels; Applicant: All those holding title under The 1st to 3rd Applicants; Respondent: M&Y Tombstone Granite Works (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: The City of Cape Town Municipality
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 March 2023
Case Number
LCC161/2022
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Restoration of Residence Under Section 14 of Esta; Opposed and Heard on Urgent Basis
Outcome
Application granted. Noncompliance with rules condoned. First respondent ordered to provide suitable alternative accommodation or financial compensation to applicants pending finalization of the eviction application.
Judges
Ncube
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Unlawful Eviction, Suitable Alternative Accommodation, Constitutional Right to Housing, Condonation, Restoration of Residence
Land and Property Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Extension of Security of Tenure Act Unlawful Eviction Suitable Alternative Accommodation Constitutional Right to Housing Condonation +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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lorraine Daniels

Applicant

Gavin Daniels

Applicant

Lindsay Britton

Applicant

Lorrentia Daniels

Applicant

All those holding title under The 1st to 3rd Applicants

Applicant

M&Y Tombstone Granite Works (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

The City of Cape Town Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Restoration of Residence Under Section 14 of Esta; Opposed and Heard on Urgent Basis

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were evicted and their residence demolished without a court order contrary to ESTA and the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether suitable alternative accommodation was provided to the applicants.
  3. 3 Whether condonation for late filing of the answering affidavit should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' residence was demolished without a court order, in contravention of both the Constitution and ESTA. The respondent, as the person in charge, was aware of the pending eviction application and should not have demolished the house or evicted the applicants without judicial sanction. The alternative accommodation provided was not suitable, failing to meet the statutory definition and the reasonable needs of the applicants. The court exercised its discretion to condone the late filing of the answering affidavit but emphasized the importance of respecting court directives and the rule of law. Restoration of residence on the original property was not feasible...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Noncompliance with rules condoned. First respondent ordered to provide suitable alternative accommodation or financial compensation to applicants pending finalization of the eviction application.

Orders

  • Noncompliance with the Rules relating to form, service and timelines is condoned and the application is dealt with as one of urgency.
  • The application is granted.