Sebigi v Strauss (LANC161/2024; LANC161/2024B) [2025] ZALCC 2 (15 January 2025)
The Court found that the First Respondent's actions—removal of the roof, windows, and doors, disconnection of water and electricity, and installation of a disruptive alarm—constituted constructive eviction, violating the Applicant's rights under sections 5 and 6 of ESTA and section 26 of the Constitution. The evidence showed that the Applicant was an occupier entitled to ESTA protections and that the alternative accommodation offered was inadequate and undignified. The Court held that the Rental Housing Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over ESTA matters and its order for arrear rental was a nullity. The requirements for urgent eviction under section 15 of ESTA were not met, as there was no...
- Citation
- [2025] ZALCC 2
- Parties
- Applicant: August Matshidiso Sebigi; Respondent: Andries Jacobus Strauss; Respondent: Gauteng Rental Housing Tribunal; Respondent: Sheriff, Westonaria; Respondent: Magistrate, Westonaria; Respondent: Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development; Respondent: Rand West City Local Municipality
- Court
- Land Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 15 January 2025
- Case Number
- LANC161/2024; LANC161/2024B
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Final Judgment After Oral Evidence and Consolidated Hearing
- Outcome
- Restoration application granted; urgent eviction application dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- Flatela
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Constructive Eviction, Restoration of Rights, Urgent Eviction, Suitable Alternative Accommodation, Review of Tribunal Decision
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
August Matshidiso Sebigi
Applicant
Andries Jacobus Strauss
Respondent
Gauteng Rental Housing Tribunal
Respondent
Sheriff, Westonaria
Respondent
Magistrate, Westonaria
Respondent
Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development
Respondent
Rand West City Local Municipality
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment After Oral Evidence and Consolidated Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conduct of the First Respondent amounted to constructive eviction of the Applicant contrary to ESTA.
- 2 Whether the Applicant is entitled to restoration of residence and rights under section 14 of ESTA.
- 3 Whether the requirements for urgent eviction under section 15 of ESTA were met by the First Respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the First Respondent's actions—removal of the roof, windows, and doors, disconnection of water and electricity, and installation of a disruptive alarm—constituted constructive eviction, violating the Applicant's rights under sections 5 and 6 of ESTA and section 26 of the Constitution. The evidence showed that the Applicant was an occupier entitled to ESTA protections and that the alternative accommodation offered was inadequate and undignified. The Court held that the Rental Housing Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over ESTA matters and its order for arrear rental was a nullity. The requirements for urgent eviction under section 15 of ESTA were not met, as there was no...
Court Disposition
Restoration application granted; urgent eviction application dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The First Respondent shall restore and replace all windows, window panes, and doors in the structure occupied by the Applicant and restore to the Applicant any other rights and resources previously enjoyed at 11 Acacia Avenue, Dennydale AH, Westonaria.
- The order of the Gauteng Housing Tribunal is declared a nullity.
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