South Africa Case Law

VRFT Properties CC and Another v Floris and Others (LANC02R/2025)

VRFT Properties CC and Another v Floris and Others (LANC02R/2025) [2025] ZALCC 15 (14 March 2025)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LANC02R/2025

Judge

Flatela

The Land Claims Court found that the Magistrate's Court erred in applying section 11 of ESTA to the respondents, who had occupied the farm since before 4 February 1997, making section 10 applicable. The Magistrate failed to resolve factual disputes regarding the respondents' residence and did not properly apply the Plascon-Evans principle. The applicants did not make a genuine effort to secure suitable alternative accommodation, and the probation officer's report was not adequately considered. The eviction would result in homelessness, and meaningful engagement and mediation were not sufficie…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Eviction Proceedings
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Meaningful Engagement
• Alternative Accommodation
• Constitutional Right To Housing

Mantsopa Local Municipality v All Unlawful and Unidentified Persons and Others (3591/2024)

Mantsopa Local Municipality v All Unlawful and Unidentified Persons and Others (3591/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 64 (27 February 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3591/2024

Judge

Mpama AJ

The High Court confirmed an eviction order against unlawful occupiers on municipal land in Ladybrand, finding the occupation recent and justifying a two-month vacate period.

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Section 26 Right To Housing
• Unlawful Occupation
• Eviction Procedure
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Municipal Duties

Kwababa and Another v Yandisa Investment Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others (2022/003687)

Kwababa and Another v Yandisa Investment Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others (2022/003687) [2024] ZAGPJHC 538 (6 June 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/003687

Judge

Maenetje AJ

The court found that the applicants were not present nor represented when the eviction order was granted, and that there was no evidence the court actively engaged with their personal circumstances as required by PIE and constitutional jurisprudence. In the absence of written reasons for the order, the applicants' contention that the mandatory inquiry was not conducted must be accepted at a prima facie level. The applicants face imminent eviction, and without interim relief, their rescission application would be rendered academic. The requirements for an interim interdict are met: the applica…

Source excerpt

• Eviction Proceedings
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Urgent Interdict
• Right To Housing

Paul De Villers Family Trust and Others v Pietersen and Others (06R2023; 2410/21)

Paul De Villers Family Trust and Others v Pietersen and Others (06R2023; 2410/21) [2023] ZALCC 6 (28 January 2023)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

06R2023; 2410/21

Judge

Flatela

The Land Claims Court found that the settlement agreement, made an order of court by the magistrate, was in substance an eviction order that failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of ESTA. The agreement bypassed the statutory protections for occupiers, including the need for substantive and procedural fairness, proper consideration of the probation officer's report, and assurance of suitable alternative accommodation. The probation officer's report expressly recommended against eviction due to the respondents' indigent status, lack of alternative accommodation, and the presence of v…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Eviction Procedure
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Probation Officer Report
• Right To Housing
• Children's Rights

Dawson v Sidney on Vaal CPA and Another (603/2019)

Dawson v Sidney on Vaal CPA and Another (603/2019) [2022] ZANCHC 29 (27 May 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

603/2019

Judge

AG van Tonder

The court held that maladministration is not an independent ground for placing a Communal Property Association under administration in terms of section 13 of the Communal Property Associations Act. Instead, maladministration is one of several factors to be considered in determining whether the association is unwilling or unable to pay its debts or meet its obligations. The applicant failed to establish special circumstances or good cause for the appointment of an administrator and did not discharge the onus required to persuade the court to exercise its discretion. The court found no reasonab…

Source excerpt

• Communal Property Associations Act
• Appointment Of Administrator
• Leave To Appeal
• Just And Equitable Standard

Oostenwald and Another v Retignled and Others (LCC 13R/2021)

Oostenwald and Another v Retignled and Others (LCC 13R/2021) [2022] ZALCC 10 (4 April 2022)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 13R/2021

Judge

Flatela

The Magistrate erred by failing to properly apply the Plascon-Evans rule to factual disputes and by disregarding the respondent's evidence without adequate justification. The right of occupation agreement was not neutral and limited the rights of vulnerable parties, contrary to constitutional and statutory protections. The Magistrate did not adequately consider the probation officer's report or balance the competing constitutional rights of the owner and occupier. The respondent demonstrated lack of suitable alternative accommodation and would suffer undue hardship if evicted. The eviction or…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Eviction Proceedings
• Probation Officer Report
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Labour Tenant Status
• Constitutional Property Rights

First Reality (Krugersdorp) (Pty) Ltd v G Mitchell and others (LCC 123/2018)

First Reality (Krugersdorp) (Pty) Ltd v G Mitchell and others (LCC 123/2018) [2021] ZALCC 6 (13 April 2021)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 123/2018

Judge

Carelse

The Land Claims Court dismissed an eviction application under ESTA because the applicant failed to prove valid termination of residence and procedural compliance.

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Eviction Proceedings
• Right To Family Life
• Termination Of Right Of Residence
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Procedural Fairness

N.M and Another v Mnyameni and Others (3892/2019)

N.M and Another v Mnyameni and Others (3892/2019) [2020] ZAFSHC 201 (31 July 2020)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3892/2019

Judge

Mhlambi

The court found that, given the pending action under case number 1112/2020 challenging the applicants' ownership and alleging fraud, it would not be just and equitable to grant an eviction order at this stage. The PIE Act and Constitution require consideration of all relevant circumstances, including the interests of the occupier and the unresolved ownership dispute. The parties agreed to have the matter decided on the papers, and the court determined that postponement was appropriate to avoid prejudicing the first respondent before the main case is finalised. Dismissing the application outri…

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Eviction Proceedings
• Just And Equitable Standard
• Section 26 Constitution
• Ownership Dispute
• Pending Action Stay

Aquarius Platinum (SA) (Pty) v Bonene and Others (1177/2018)

Aquarius Platinum (SA) (Pty) v Bonene and Others (1177/2018) [2020] ZASCA 7; [2020] 2 All SA 323 (SCA); 2020 (5) SA 28 (SCA) (16 March 2020)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1177/2018

Judges

MAYA, SALDULKER, VAN DER MERWE, MOCUMIE, DOLAMO

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to comply with the statutory requirements for eviction under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act. Specifically, the appellant did not terminate the occupiers' right of residence as required by section 8 of ESTA. The court emphasized that termination of employment does not automatically result in termination of the right of residence; a separate and specific notice of termination must be given. The appellant only served notices of intention to obtain eviction orders under section 9, and in some cases, these were served before emplo…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Eviction Procedure
• Termination Of Right Of Residence
• Just And Equitable Standard

Cosmopolitan Projects Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd v Leoa and Others (LCC174/2016)

Cosmopolitan Projects Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd v Leoa and Others (LCC174/2016) [2019] ZALCC 1 (31 May 2019)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC174/2016

Judge

Barnes AJ

The applicant failed to establish that the requirements of section 8 of ESTA were met. The termination of the respondents' right of residence was not lawful, just or equitable, as the respondents were not afforded procedural fairness or an opportunity to make representations before the decision was made. The settlement agreement and consent forms could not validly waive the respondents' statutory rights under ESTA. The notice relied upon by the applicant was insufficient and impermissibly conflated procedural steps. The applicant is not entitled to an eviction order, and the application must…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Eviction Requirements
• Termination Of Right Of Residence
• Procedural Fairness
• Settlement Agreements
• Just And Equitable Standard