Horseshoe Investments 0023 CC and Another v Smith and Others

The applicants, Horseshoe Investments 0023 CC and Andre Adriaan Badenhorst, sought the eviction of the first to third respondents from Jakkalsfontein Farm near Malmesbury. The respondents were occupiers protected under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA). In proceedings before the Malmesbury Magistrates’ Court, the parties concluded a settlement agreement regulating the respondents’ vacation of the farm and providing for their eviction by the Sheriff should they fail to vacate. The settlement further imposed obligations on the Swartland Municipality and the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development to facilitate the sale and purchase of alternative land (Erf 1140, Abbotsdale) and to make it available for occupation by the respondents. The magistrate made the settlement agreement an order of court on 27 May 2025. As the order constituted an eviction under ESTA, it was subject to automatic review by the Land Court under section 19(3) of ESTA.

The magistrate’s court order of 27 May 2025 was confirmed on automatic review, subject to an amendment substituting the date for making Erf 1140 available for occupation to on or before 30 March 2026. In all other respects, the settlement agreement and magistrate’s court order remained unchanged.

The case illustrates the Land Court’s supervisory role over ESTA eviction orders and its approach to reviewing settlement agreements that result in evictions. It confirms that eviction-related settlements must comply with the substantive and procedural protections of ESTA and demonstrates the Court’s willingness to make limited adjustments to ensure practical and equitable implementation, particularly regarding alternative accommodation.