Manus Snyman and Others v Abram Sehemo and Others

The defendants were long-term occupiers of the farm Gelukshoop in Delareyville, residing there since before 4 February 1997 and thus protected under section 10 of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA). They had been employed by the first plaintiff until their dismissal in 2003 following a strike, which dismissal was confirmed as fair by the CCMA. Their right of residence was thereafter terminated under section 8(2) of ESTA. Despite notices being properly served, they refused to vacate. The Magistrate’s Court granted an eviction order, which came before the Land Claims Court on automatic review in terms of section 19(3) of ESTA.

The eviction order granted by the Magistrate’s Court was set aside on review, as was the accompanying costs order.

This case clarifies the strict interpretation of section 10(1)(c) of ESTA and reinforces the high threshold required to prove a fundamental, irremediable breach of the occupier–owner relationship. It affirms that ESTA occupiers may not be penalized for asserting their rights through the courts and underscores the Land Claims Court’s consistent approach that costs are not ordinarily awarded in ESTA litigation.