Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Little Graduates School CC v K2023253684 (South Africa) Pty Ltd (2024-148094) [2025] ZAGPPHC 270 (17 March 2025)
The High Court restored a school’s possession of its premises under the mandament van spolie, found unlawful self-help, granted an interdict, and awarded punitive costs.
Lewray Investments (Pty) Ltd v City of Johannesburg and Others (2025/024502) [2025] ZAGPJHC 143 (25 February 2025)
The High Court set aside the City of Johannesburg’s eviction of Lewray Investments, held the spoliation unlawful, ordered restoration of possession, and granted punitive costs.
Chokoe and Others v MEC for Human Settlements and Others (031031/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1237 (26 November 2024)
The court held that the municipality could not demolish or evict without a court order, found spoliation on the papers, and ordered reconstruction of the applicants’ structures.
Thys v S (246/24) [2024] ZAWCHC 324; 2025 (1) SACR 243 (WCC) (21 October 2024)
The conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant for trespassing were not in accordance with justice. The appellant was an ESTA occupier, having resided on the farm all his life and not earning above the statutory income threshold. The magistrate failed to conduct a proper inquiry into the appellant's status under ESTA and allowed the criminal process to be used as a mechanism for eviction, contrary to constitutional and statutory protections. The Trespass Act cannot be used to evict an ESTA occupier, and criminal proceedings must yield to the procedural safeguards of ESTA and the Constit…
Source excerpt
City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v Bantham and Others (128720/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 809 (16 August 2024)
Leave to appeal was dismissed in a spoliation matter after the City unlawfully demolished informal dwellings without a court order.
Mabusela and Others v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2024/063770) [2024] ZAGPJHC 701 (22 July 2024)
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
Masike and Others v Red Ant Security Relocation and Eviction Services Proprietary Limited and Another (04238/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1460 (18 December 2023)
The High Court declared an eviction unlawful, ordered restoration measures, and directed the municipality to investigate and help secure emergency accommodation.
Seale and Others v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Another (2023/078684) [2023] ZAGPPHC 754 (25 August 2023)
The court found that the Applicants were unlawfully evicted and their homes demolished by the Respondents without a valid court order, in direct contravention of section 26(3) of the Constitution and PIE. The Respondents' reliance on a 2017 interdict against unidentified persons could not justify ongoing evictions against the present, identified Applicants. The evidence, including photographs, videos, and in loco inspection, established that the Applicants had peaceful and undisturbed possession, and the Respondents' actions amounted to spoliation. The Applicants are entitled to restoration o…
Source excerpt
van Rooi and Another v Izinyoni Trading 271 (Pty) Ltd and Another (LCC 2022/73) [2023] ZALCC 26 (17 August 2023)
The court found that the applicants were unlawfully evicted from their homestead on land owned by the Hans Coetzee Trust, without a valid court order as required by ESTA and the Constitution. The second respondent, acting on behalf of the Trust, orchestrated the eviction and demolition of the homestead, relying on false representations of a court order to the police, who assisted in the eviction and detention of the applicants. Despite citation errors regarding the land and respondents, the substantive facts established that the applicants were entitled to restoration and reinstatement of occ…
Source excerpt
Dlamini v Ncube and Others (01355/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 496 (22 May 2023)
Urgent spoliation application granted after the respondent changed apartment locks and cut off access, restoring possession to the applicant.
Explore more
