Occupiers of Saratoga Avenue v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Another

The applicants were occupiers of a building at 7 Saratoga Avenue, Johannesburg, owned by Blue Moonlight Properties. In earlier litigation (Blue Moonlight I), the Constitutional Court upheld an eviction order but required the City of Johannesburg to provide specified occupiers with temporary emergency accommodation by 1 April 2012, with eviction to occur by 15 April 2012. Before that deadline, the occupiers launched an urgent application directly in the Constitutional Court, alleging anticipated non-compliance by the City. They contended that the City would not provide accommodation to all persons living with or through the listed occupiers, sought a variation of the original order to include those persons, requested extensions of the deadlines, and asked for an order compelling meaningful engagement. Shortly before the hearing, the City and occupiers reached a settlement postponing eviction, without involving the property owner.

The urgent application was dismissed. No order as to costs was made.

The case clarifies that, absent explicit supervisory language, orders made by the Constitutional Court on appeal are to be enforced and potentially varied in the court of first instance, not in the Constitutional Court itself. It limits attempts to invoke the Court’s just and equitable powers for post-judgment supervision where none was intended, and it underscores the importance of proper forum selection in eviction and housing disputes.