City of Cape Town v Commando and Others

The respondents were long-term occupiers of residential units at erf 10626, Bromwell Street, Woodstock, Cape Town, which was purchased by Woodstock Hub (Pty) Ltd. Eviction proceedings were instituted under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 (PIE), resulting in eviction orders by consent in 2016. Facing homelessness, the occupiers engaged the City of Cape Town seeking temporary emergency accommodation near their existing homes in the inner city. The City offered emergency accommodation at Wolwerivier, approximately 30 km away, and later other sites outside the inner city. The occupiers rejected these offers and challenged the City’s emergency housing programme and its implementation, alleging it was unconstitutional for failing to provide emergency or transitional housing in the inner city or nearby areas. The Western Cape High Court declared the City’s programme unconstitutional and ordered the City to provide emergency or transitional housing in Woodstock, Salt River or the Inner-City Precinct. The City appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with no order as to costs. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order directing the City of Cape Town to provide the occupiers and their dependants with temporary emergency accommodation in a location as near as possible to their current residence by 30 May 2023, and extending the date for vacating the property to 30 June 2023.

The case clarifies the scope of a municipality’s constitutional duty to provide emergency housing, reaffirming that while emergency accommodation must be provided to prevent homelessness, courts should not dictate specific locations or restructure housing policy. It reinforces separation of powers principles in socio-economic rights litigation while still emphasising the need for context-sensitive, just and equitable relief in eviction-related housing disputes.