Pepler N.O and Others v Lombaard and Others (LCC 113/2020) [2024] ZALCC 1 (22 January 2024)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC 113/2020
Judge
S Cowen
The Land Claims Court granted an ESTA eviction against occupiers of Cottage 7, finding the termination of residence rights fair and just and equitable.
Delta 200 Properties (Pty) Ltd v D and Others (LCC31/2019) [2020] ZALCC 24 (12 August 2020)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC31/2019
Judge
Cowen
The court found that Mr and Mrs D are ESTA occupiers entitled to protection, but neither was an occupier on 4 February 1997, making section 11 of ESTA applicable. The applicant lawfully terminated their rights of residence through a procedurally fair process, affording them an opportunity to make representations. The substantive grounds for termination were just and equitable, given the breakdown of the relationship, lack of rental payments, and the applicant's commercial interests. The respondents' financial hardship and disruption to their children's education were considered, but the court…
Hupp Properties (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Others v Moneni and Others (LCC308/2017) [2019] ZALCC 18 (10 May 2019)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC308/2017
Judge
Canca
The Land Claims Court granted an ESTA eviction, finding the occupiers’ residence was lawfully terminated and that alternative accommodation arrangements were adequate.
Eskom Holdings Soc Limited v Persons Listed in Annexure A to the Notice of Motion and Others (27605/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 662 (12 June 2015)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
27605/2015
Judge
AC Basson
High Court application under section 18 of the Superior Courts Act granted execution of an eviction order pending appeal, with alternative accommodation ordered.
Voges NO and Another v Molusi and Others (LCC 85/2010) [2013] ZALCC 1 (18 January 2013)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC 85/2010
Judge
Y Sidlova
The Land Claims Court granted an eviction under ESTA after finding the periodic leases were validly terminated on reasonable notice and the statutory requirements were met.
Moller and Others v Nhatladisha and Others (LCC06/07) [2008] ZALCC 11 (4 June 2008)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC06/07
Judge
Gildenhuys
The court found, on the balance of probabilities and credibility of witnesses, that the respondents were not residing in the road camp at the time the first applicant acquired the property in March 1999. Their occupation commenced later and was dependent on the employment of the first and third respondents, with explicit contractual terms limiting residence to the duration of employment. The second and fourth respondents, as family members, did not acquire independent rights of occupation under ESTA. Upon termination of employment, all rights of residence ceased. The applicants complied with…