South Africa Case Law

Phelelo and Others v Kgetlengrivier Local Municipality and Others (6521/24)

Phelelo and Others v Kgetlengrivier Local Municipality and Others (6521/24) [2025] ZANWHC 66 (2 April 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

6521/24

Judge

Mfenyana

The court found that the applicants failed to establish urgency as required by Rule 6(12)(b). The founding papers did not set out explicit circumstances or reasons why substantial redress could not be obtained in due course. The applicants delayed approaching the court despite being aware of the sewerage spillages for months, and their conduct amounted to self-created urgency. The relief sought was incoherent, conflating interim and final relief, and prejudicial to the respondents. The application was struck off the roll for want of urgency, and costs were awarded against the applicants on a…

Source excerpt

• Urgent Interdict
• Municipal Duties
• Environmental Contamination
• Rule 6 12 Procedure

Madimetja v Unlawful Occupiers of Remaining Extent of ERF 5[...] City and Suburban and Others (025803/25)

Madimetja v Unlawful Occupiers of Remaining Extent of ERF 5[...] City and Suburban and Others (025803/25) [2025] ZAGPJHC 331 (19 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

025803/25

Judge

Manoim

The High Court dismissed an urgent application to remove occupiers from a building, holding that the Building Standards Act notice requirements were not met and PIE procedures applied.

• Eviction Proceedings
• Urgent Interdict
• National Building Regulations
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Locus Standi
• Municipal Duties

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

Democratic Alliance v Premier of the Free State Province and Others (1623/2024)

Democratic Alliance v Premier of the Free State Province and Others (1623/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 338 (22 October 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1623/2024

Judge

Van Rhyn

High Court declared Matjhabeng Municipality in breach of constitutional duties and ordered provincial or national intervention, a recovery plan, and costs.

• Municipal Duties
• Financial Recovery Plan
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Cooperative Government
• Service Delivery Failure
• Structural Interdict

Sakeliga NPC and Others v Ditsobotla Local Municipality and Others (M311/2021)

Sakeliga NPC and Others v Ditsobotla Local Municipality and Others (M311/2021) [2024] ZANWHC 194 (22 July 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M311/2021

Judge

FMM Reid

The respondents failed to fulfil their constitutional duty to provide sufficient water to the public, resulting in a severe water crisis that affected both people and animals. Their opposition to the application was unwarranted and amounted to an attempt to circumvent their obligations under section 27 of the Constitution. The applicants acted in the public interest and were substantially successful. Given the respondents' conduct and the public interest nature of the litigation, a punitive costs order on the attorney and own client scale is justified to penalize the respondents and encourage…

Source excerpt

• Right Of Access To Water
• Municipal Duties
• Public Interest Litigation
• Punitive Costs
• Attorney And Own Client Scale

Virginia Engineering Services (Pty) Ltd v De Lange and Others (993/2023)

Virginia Engineering Services (Pty) Ltd v De Lange and Others (993/2023) [2023] ZAFSHC 289 (12 June 2023)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

993/2023

Judge

P R Cronjé

High Court PIE eviction matter. The court ordered eviction with four months’ notice, finding the respondent had long known his occupation was challenged.

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Eviction Procedure
• Just And Equitable Order
• Alternative Accommodation
• Municipal Duties
• Prevention-of-illegal-eviction

City of Cape Town v Commando and Others (1303/2021)

City of Cape Town v Commando and Others (1303/2021) [2023] ZASCA 7; [2023] 2 All SA 23 (SCA); 2023 (4) SA 465 (SCA) (6 February 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1303/2021

Judges

Zondi, Nicholls, Mabindla-Boqwana, Goosen, Siwendu

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the City of Cape Town's emergency housing programme and its implementation were not unconstitutional for failing to provide temporary emergency accommodation in the inner city and surrounds. The Court found no legal basis for a constitutional duty requiring the municipality to provide emergency housing at a specific location. The legislative framework, including the Housing Act and National Housing Code, does not impose such a duty, and the line of cases since Grootboom does not support it. The Court emphasised that the separation of powers prevents judic…

Source excerpt

• Right To Housing
• Emergency Accommodation
• Municipal Duties
• Just And Equitable Orders
• Separation Of Powers
• Gentrification And Eviction

Midnight Feast Properties 11 (PTY) Ltd and Another v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (26799/2022)

Midnight Feast Properties 11 (PTY) Ltd and Another v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (26799/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 951 (28 November 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

26799/2022

Judge

M A Makume

The court found the application urgent due to the potential danger posed by illegal electricity connections near the applicants' premises. The applicants established locus standi based on constitutional rights and public interest. However, the municipality demonstrated ongoing efforts to address illegal connections, including coordination with law enforcement to mitigate risks associated with removal operations. The applicants failed to show that there was no satisfactory alternative relief or that the balance of convenience favored granting interim relief. The court concluded that, while the…

Source excerpt

• Interim Interdict
• Locus Standi
• Danger To Life And Property
• Section 24 Rights
• Urgent Application
• Municipal Duties

Ryckloff-Beleggings (EDMS) Beperk v Occupiers of ERF 791 of the Farm Randjesfontein and Others (2019/18156)

Ryckloff-Beleggings (EDMS) Beperk v Occupiers of ERF 791 of the Farm Randjesfontein and Others (2019/18156) [2022] ZAGPJHC 735 (5 June 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2019/18156

Judge

L Windell

The City of Johannesburg repeatedly failed to comply with court orders requiring meaningful engagement and provision of information regarding alternative accommodation for the occupiers, who are informal waste pickers. The City's reports lacked transparency and did not demonstrate genuine efforts to identify suitable land, instead unilaterally limiting options to informal settlements and disregarding the occupiers' livelihood needs. The Johannesburg Property Company, as the City's asset manager, resisted disclosure of its property list, but the court found that such information was essential…

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Meaningful Engagement
• Just And Equitable Eviction
• Municipal Duties
• Contempt Of Court
• Adequate Housing

Albert Luthuli Local Municipality and Another v Erwe 201 and 207 Germiston West CC and Others (2822/2027)

Albert Luthuli Local Municipality and Another v Erwe 201 and 207 Germiston West CC and Others (2822/2027) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 29 (11 May 2022)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

2822/2027

Judge

B A Mashile

The court found that both the 2011 and 2017 orders are constitutionally sound and enforceable. The Municipality's arguments regarding impossibility, lack of specificity, and constitutional invalidity were rejected. The orders do not directly affect the rights of occupiers at this stage, as any eviction or demolition would require further proceedings where affected parties could be heard. The Municipality's delay in seeking rescission was inordinate and unexplained, and the defence of res judicata applies, barring the application. The alternative relief sought by the Municipality is unnecessar…

Source excerpt

• Eviction Proceedings
• Municipal Duties
• Building Regulations
• Consent To Occupy Land
• Res Judicata
• Constitutional Rights