South Africa Case Law

City of Cape Town v Hearne and Others (5453/2022)

City of Cape Town v Hearne and Others (5453/2022) [2024] ZAWCHC 253 (10 September 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

5453/2022

Judge

Pangarker

The court found that the respondents are unlawful occupiers under the PIE Act, having occupied the Pentech-Belhar units without lawful consent or allocation. Any purported consent by City officials was ultra vires and revoked by service of eviction notices. The respondents’ occupation prejudiced beneficiaries who had lawfully waited for housing allocation, some for decades. The court considered the respondents’ personal circumstances and the risk of homelessness, concluding that while some may secure alternative accommodation, others face imminent homelessness and must be provided with emerge…

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Unlawful Occupation
• Just And Equitable Eviction
• Housing Rights
• Allocation Policy
• Emergency Accommodation

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v Bantham and Others (128720/2023)

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v Bantham and Others (128720/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 809 (16 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

128720/2023

Judge

Wilson

Leave to appeal was dismissed in a spoliation matter after the City unlawfully demolished informal dwellings without a court order.

• Spoliation
• Counter Spoliation
• Unlawful Eviction
• Restoration Of Possession
• Housing Rights
• Counter-spoliation

Mabusela and Others v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2024/063770)

Mabusela and Others v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2024/063770) [2024] ZAGPJHC 701 (22 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/063770

Judge

C Todd

The court found that the First Respondent's actions in removing the Applicants and destroying or confiscating their shelters and possessions were unlawful, as they were not supported by a court order and did not fall within the narrow defence of counter-spoliation. The Respondent was neither the owner of the land nor acting with the owner's authority, and its conduct exceeded what is permissible under law. The Applicants, having established peaceful possession, were entitled to protection under the PIE Act and the spoliation remedy. The court declined to grant a wide-ranging restoratory order…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Eviction
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Spoliation Remedy
• Housing Rights
• Counter Spoliation
• Constitutional Dignity

Nelson and Another v B.S and Others (2350/2020)

Nelson and Another v B.S and Others (2350/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 207 (19 October 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2350/2020

Judge

P.A.L. Gamble

The court found that the respondents have been in unlawful occupation of the applicants' property for an extended period, causing the applicants significant financial and personal hardship. Despite opportunities to secure alternative accommodation, the respondents failed to take meaningful steps, and their offer to pay rent was both inadequate and untimely. The applicants demonstrated considerable tolerance and compassion, but cannot be expected to accommodate the respondents indefinitely. The court considered the personal circumstances of the respondents, including vulnerability and income l…

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Just And Equitable Eviction
• Housing Rights
• Costs Order
• Ubuntu Principle

Nkomazi Local Municipality and Another v Mkhabela and Others (719/2017)

Nkomazi Local Municipality and Another v Mkhabela and Others (719/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 661 (20 October 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

719/2017

Judge

M F Legodi

The court upheld an eviction order against occupiers of 32 housing units built for approved beneficiaries, holding that pending applications and trust-based claims did not justify self-help.

• Unlawful Occupation
• Eviction
• Housing Rights
• Self Help
• Approved Beneficiaries
• Constitutional Obligations

292 Beneficiaries of Isekelo House Projects v Gauteng Department of Housing and Another (12634/2012)

292 Beneficiaries of Isekelo House Projects v Gauteng Department of Housing and Another (12634/2012) [2014] ZAGPJHC 287 (14 May 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

12634/2012

Judge

Swartz

The court dismissed a housing-related application by 292 beneficiaries, holding they lacked locus standi to enforce a land development agreement they had not signed.

• Legitimate Expectation
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Housing Rights
• Locus Standi
• Locus-standi
• Legitimate-expectation

MEC for Department of Human Settlements, Gauteng Province v Molema and Another (44773/13)

MEC for Department of Human Settlements, Gauteng Province v Molema and Another (44773/13) [2013] ZAGPPHC 372 (20 December 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

44773/13

Judge

Tuchten

High Court urgent eviction case requiring alternative accommodation before eviction of unlawful occupiers, with court oversight over relocation-site suitability.

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Alternative Accommodation
• Eviction Procedure
• Housing Rights
• Constitutional Dignity
• Judicial Oversight

MEC For Department of Human Settlements, Gauteng Province v Molema (44773/13)

MEC For Department of Human Settlements, Gauteng Province v Molema (44773/13) [2013] ZAGPPHC 438 (20 December 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

44773/13

Judge

Tuchten

High Court eviction case requiring suitable alternative accommodation before unlawful occupiers of state land at Soutpan could be removed.

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Alternative Accommodation
• Eviction Procedure
• Housing Rights
• Constitutional Dignity
• State Land Development

South African National Road Agency Ltd v Smith and Others (A 649/2011)

South African National Road Agency Ltd v Smith and Others (A 649/2011) [2012] ZAWCHC 327 (9 October 2012)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A 649/2011

Judges

Davis, Dlodlo

The High Court set aside a costs order against the City of Cape Town in an eviction matter, finding the City had cooperated and acted reasonably.

• Costs Orders
• Unlawful Eviction
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Municipal Obligations
• Housing Rights
• Constitutional Balance

Kungwini Local Municipality v Puntlyf 520 Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC 86/2007)

Kungwini Local Municipality v Puntlyf 520 Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC 86/2007) [2007] ZALCC 12 (14 September 2007)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 86/2007

Judge

Gildenhuys

The court found that the true purpose of the intended expropriation was not to develop housing or protect constitutional housing rights, but to enable the occupiers to remain on the land in defiance of a valid court order. The municipality failed to demonstrate that the expropriation was for a public purpose or in the public interest, and did not comply with procedural fairness requirements under PAJA, as the land owners were not given an opportunity to make representations. The municipality's resolutions regarding expropriation were either improperly taken or did not specifically authorise e…

Source excerpt

• Expropriation Act
• Municipal Powers
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Housing Rights
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Public Interest Requirement