An appeal to the Constitutional Court against an interim execution order from the South Gauteng High Court, allowing for the eviction of the applicants, while an appeal regarding the merits of the eviction was still pending before the Supreme Court of Appeal. This case dealt with the right to have access to adequate housing.
The matter before the SCA questioned the validity of the sale agreement and argued for the setting aside of the eviction order for the occupants of the property. The SCA held the sale of the property to be invalid and set aside the orders made by the High Court by granting the relief sought with regards to the sale of the property and setting aside the eviction order.
The Constitutional Court rejected the decision of the High Court to grant the eviction order solely on the basis of the first respondent’s property rights, while failing to have regard to important constitutional and legislative provisions. The Court emphasized the need to consider the constitutional implications of arbitrary evictions, which are specifically protected against in section 26(3) of the Constitution and the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, 19 of 1998 (PIE), and reiterated that the application of PIE is not discretionary. Therefore, all courts are obliged to consider the provisions of PIE in eviction cases, regardless of whether or not it is pleaded before a court.
In deciding whether the interim eviction order was subject to appeal, the Constitutional Court confirmed that it could be appealed and adjudicated, as cases associated with evictions and subsequent homelessness always raised constitutional matters (See, Jaftha v Schoeman and Others; Van Rooyen v Stoltz and Others 2005 (2) SA 140 (CC) at para 34).
Finally, this case illustrates a conflict of constitutional interests between property rights and housing rights and appears to regard the protection afforded by PIE as very wide. As Justice Skweyiya states, “the sudden loss of one’s home is an indignity for anyone, and the protections provided by the Constitution apply regardless of socio-economic status” [para 29].
(Updated June 2015)