Theart v Deon Minnaar NO and Senekal v Winskor 174 (Pty) Ltd

Two consolidated appeals before the Supreme Court of Appeal concerned eviction proceedings under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 (PIE) in the magistrates’ courts. In Theart, the appellants occupied the respondent’s property under an option to purchase, which lapsed due to non-payment. After notice of termination, the respondent instituted eviction proceedings. A notice in terms of s 4(2) of PIE and a magistrates’ court rule 55 notice of motion were authorised by the court and served simultaneously. In Senekal, the appellant occupied property without any lease or right after a change of ownership. The respondent sought eviction using a single notice of motion containing all information required by s 4(2) and s 4(5) of PIE, authorised by the magistrate. In both matters the occupiers opposed eviction only on procedural grounds, arguing non-compliance with s 4(2) because separate notices were not issued and served.

Both appeals were dismissed with costs. The eviction orders granted by the magistrates’ courts, as amended by the High Court, were confirmed, with specified periods for the occupiers to vacate the properties failing which the sheriff was authorised to evict them.

The case authoritatively clarifies the procedural requirements for eviction proceedings under PIE in magistrates’ courts. It confirms that, unlike in the High Court, two separate notices are not required and that a single, court-authorised notice complying with s 4(5) may suffice. The judgment reinforces a purposive and pragmatic approach to PIE, prioritising effective notice and fairness over technical formalism, and has become a key authority on eviction procedure in magistrates’ courts.