Nederburg Wines Proprietary Limited v Nero and Others

The first respondent was employed by the applicant, Nederburg Wines (Pty) Ltd, as an irrigator from 1993 and acquired a right of residence on the farm in terms of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA). His family members, cited as the second to fifth respondents and other occupiers, resided with him. In 2008 the first respondent developed alcohol dependency and underwent rehabilitation funded by the applicant, agreeing to random alcohol testing. In December 2011 he tested positive for alcohol while on duty, pleaded guilty at a disciplinary hearing, and was dismissed. His right of residence was terminated and, following a CCMA settlement, he was required to vacate by 30 November 2013 but failed to do so. The applicant sought eviction under section 10(1)(c) of ESTA, alleging fundamental breach based on the misconduct and additional allegations of misconduct by some of the respondent’s children. The eviction application was unopposed but dismissed. The present judgment concerns the applicant’s application for leave to appeal against that dismissal.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

The case reinforces the strict evidentiary and substantive requirements for evictions under ESTA and underscores the protective purpose of the Act. It affirms that dismissal from employment and a single act of misconduct do not automatically justify eviction, and that landowners bear a heavy onus to prove both fundamental breach and irreparable breakdown of the relationship, or serious prejudice under section 10(3).