Nwobi and Another v Metsing and Others (2017/043444) [2025] ZAGPJHC 580 (10 June 2025)

Nwobi and Another v Metsing and Others (2017/043444) [2025] ZAGPJHC 580 (10 June 2025)

The court found that the respondents are unlawful occupiers as they have no valid lease agreements and have not paid rent or municipal charges. While the applicants are entitled to the use and enjoyment of their property, the court must ensure that eviction is just and equitable under section 4 of the PIE Act. Evidence showed that eight of the ten households would likely be rendered homeless if evicted, and the City of Johannesburg lacks immediate resources to provide emergency accommodation. The court therefore granted an eviction order for those respondents who would not be rendered homeless and imposed a two-year period for the City to provide temporary emergency accommodation to the...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 580
Parties
Applicant: Chioma Obieze Nwobi; Applicant: Catherine Echiona Nwobi; Respondent: Daniel Mopedi Metsing; Respondent: Molefi Elliot Makhetha; Respondent: George Nkere; Respondent: Maramba Vimbainashe; Respondent: Olaotse Mogorosi; Respondent: Piet Malefeatsane Morobe; Respondent: Qulungwane Ncube; Respondent: Samuel Babo Mofokeng; Respondent: Amogelang Mangena; Respondent: Basie Mashimbe; Respondent: All those other persons occupying Erf 1[…], Lorentzville Township, and any person occupying through them; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2025
Case Number
2017/043444
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Eviction application granted with conditions; immediate eviction for some respondents, suspended eviction for others pending provision of emergency accommodation.
Judges
Adams
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Statutory Eviction, Just and Equitable Eviction, Temporary Emergency Accommodation, Municipal Obligations, Homelessness Risk
Land and Property Civil Procedure Administrative Law Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Statutory Eviction Just and Equitable Eviction Temporary Emergency Accommodation Municipal Obligations +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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chioma Obieze Nwobi

Applicant

Catherine Echiona Nwobi

Applicant

Daniel Mopedi Metsing

Respondent

Molefi Elliot Makhetha

Respondent

George Nkere

Respondent

Maramba Vimbainashe

Respondent

Olaotse Mogorosi

Respondent

Piet Malefeatsane Morobe

Respondent

Qulungwane Ncube

Respondent

Samuel Babo Mofokeng

Respondent

Amogelang Mangena

Respondent

Basie Mashimbe

Respondent

All those other persons occupying Erf 1[…], Lorentzville Township, and any person occupying through them

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are unlawful occupiers of the property and liable to eviction under the PIE Act.
  2. 2 Whether it is just and equitable to evict the respondents, considering the risk of homelessness.
  3. 3 Whether the City of Johannesburg is obliged to provide temporary emergency accommodation to affected respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents are unlawful occupiers as they have no valid lease agreements and have not paid rent or municipal charges. While the applicants are entitled to the use and enjoyment of their property, the court must ensure that eviction is just and equitable under section 4 of the PIE Act. Evidence showed that eight of the ten households would likely be rendered homeless if evicted, and the City of Johannesburg lacks immediate resources to provide emergency accommodation. The court therefore granted an eviction order for those respondents who would not be rendered homeless and imposed a two-year period for the City to provide temporary emergency accommodation to the...

Court Disposition

Eviction application granted with conditions; immediate eviction for some respondents, suspended eviction for others pending provision of emergency accommodation.

Orders

  • First to eleventh respondents and all those occupying through them must vacate the property within two months, except those listed in paragraph 4.
  • If those respondents fail to vacate, the Sheriff is authorised to evict them, except those listed in paragraph 4.