Grootboom and Others v Oostenberg Municipality and Others (6826/99) [1999] ZAWCHC 1 (17 December 1999)
The court held that section 26 of the Constitution does not impose an immediate obligation on the State to provide adequate housing, as the right is subject to progressive realisation and available resources. The respondents demonstrated that a rational housing programme was in place, and the applicants failed to show entitlement to immediate housing under section 26. However, section 28(1)(c) confers an unqualified right to shelter on children, and the best interests of the child require that children not be separated from their parents when shelter is provided. The court declared that the State is obliged to provide shelter to the applicant children and to accommodate their parents with...
- Citation
- [1999] ZAWCHC 1
- Parties
- Applicant: Irene Grootboom and Others; Respondent: Oostenberg Municipality; Respondent: Cape Metropolitan Council; Respondent: Premier of the Province of the Western Cape; Respondent: National Housing Board; Respondent: Government of the Republic of South Africa
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 17 December 1999
- Case Number
- 6826/99
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Final Judgment After Urgent Application and Interim Relief
- Outcome
- Application for housing under section 26 dismissed; declaration granted under section 28 that children are entitled to shelter and parents may accompany them; respondents directed to report on implementation; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- D M Davis, R G Comrie
- Legal Topics
- Right to Shelter, Children Socio Economic Rights, Progressive Realisation, Minimum Core Obligation, Best Interests of Child
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Irene Grootboom and Others
Applicant
Oostenberg Municipality
Respondent
Cape Metropolitan Council
Respondent
Premier of the Province of the Western Cape
Respondent
National Housing Board
Respondent
Government of the Republic of South Africa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment After Urgent Application and Interim Relief
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the State is constitutionally obliged to provide shelter to homeless children and their parents under section 28(1)(c) of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether section 26 of the Constitution imposes an obligation on the State to provide immediate access to adequate housing.
- 3 Whether the right to shelter for children extends to their parents to preserve the family unit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that section 26 of the Constitution does not impose an immediate obligation on the State to provide adequate housing, as the right is subject to progressive realisation and available resources. The respondents demonstrated that a rational housing programme was in place, and the applicants failed to show entitlement to immediate housing under section 26. However, section 28(1)(c) confers an unqualified right to shelter on children, and the best interests of the child require that children not be separated from their parents when shelter is provided. The court declared that the State is obliged to provide shelter to the applicant children and to accommodate their parents with...
Court Disposition
Application for housing under section 26 dismissed; declaration granted under section 28 that children are entitled to shelter and parents may accompany them; respondents directed to report on implementation; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The application for housing or adequate housing under section 26 of the Constitution is dismissed.
- It is declared under section 28 of the Constitution that the applicant children are entitled to be provided with shelter by the appropriate organ or department of state.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment