South African Human Rights Commission and Others v City of Cape Town and Others (8631/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 84; 2021 (2) SA 565 (WCC) (25 August 2020)

South African Human Rights Commission and Others v City of Cape Town and Others (8631/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 84; 2021 (2) SA 565 (WCC) (25 August 2020)

The court held that both occupied and unoccupied informal dwellings are protected under PIE and section 26(3) of the Constitution, requiring judicial oversight for any eviction or demolition, especially during the national state of disaster. The City’s Anti-Land Invasion Unit acted arbitrarily and without due...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] ZAWCHC 84
Parties
Applicant: South African Human Rights Commission; Applicant: Housing Assembly; Applicant: Bulelani Qolani; Appellant: Economic Freedom Fighters; Appellant: Persons who currently occupy Erf 544, Portion 1, Mfuleni; Respondent: City of Cape Town; Respondent: Minister of Human Settlements; Respondent: Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: National Commissioner: South African Police; Respondent: Minister of Police; Respondent: Western Cape Provincial Commissioner: South African Police Service
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 August 2020
Case Number
8631/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Relief (part A) Pending Review (part B)
Outcome
Interim interdict granted in favour of the applicants and intervening applicants; City and its agents restrained from evictions and demolitions without court order; SAPS directed to ensure lawful conduct; City ordered to return seized materials and pay compensation; costs awarded as specified.
Judges
Y.S. Meer, R. Allie
Legal Topics
Eviction Proceedings, Judicial Oversight, Right to Dignity, Counter Spoliation, Disaster Management Regulations, Compensation for Loss
Constitutional Law Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Proceedings Judicial Oversight Right to Dignity Counter Spoliation Disaster Management Regulations +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Human Rights Commission

Applicant

Housing Assembly

Applicant

Bulelani Qolani

Applicant

Economic Freedom Fighters

Appellant

Persons who currently occupy Erf 544, Portion 1, Mfuleni

Appellant

City of Cape Town

Respondent

Minister of Human Settlements

Respondent

Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

National Commissioner: South African Police

Respondent

Minister of Police

Respondent

Western Cape Provincial Commissioner: South African Police Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Relief (part A) Pending Review (part B)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the City of Cape Town may evict persons or demolish informal dwellings without a court order during the national state of disaster.
  2. 2 Whether judicial oversight is required for demolitions and evictions of both occupied and unoccupied structures.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the City and its agents during evictions and demolitions violated constitutional rights to dignity and housing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that both occupied and unoccupied informal dwellings are protected under PIE and section 26(3) of the Constitution, requiring judicial oversight for any eviction or demolition, especially during the national state of disaster. The City’s Anti-Land Invasion Unit acted arbitrarily and without due process in determining occupancy, violating the rights to dignity, housing, and security. The court found that the City failed to provide any policy or objective criteria for distinguishing occupied from unoccupied structures, and that the evidence showed demolitions of occupied homes without court orders. The conduct of City officials, including the use of excessive force, was found...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted in favour of the applicants and intervening applicants; City and its agents restrained from evictions and demolitions without court order; SAPS directed to ensure lawful conduct; City ordered to return seized materials and pay compensation; costs awarded as specified.

Orders

  • The City of Cape Town, its Anti-Land Invasion Unit, and private contractors are interdicted and restrained from evicting persons from, and demolishing, any informal dwelling, hut, shack, tent, or similar structure, whether occupied or unoccupied, throughout the City Metropole, while the state of disaster remains in...
  • Evictions and demolitions conducted in terms of a court order must be done lawfully and with respect for the dignity of evicted persons; excessive force and destruction/confiscation of property are expressly prohibited.