Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd v Thwala and Others

Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd, the owner of a farm in Mpumalanga, sought orders declaring unlawful and demolishing a brick-and-mortar structure erected by occupiers (the first to fourth respondents) without its consent or engagement. The respondents were family members of a long-term occupier under ESTA. After a prior court order in 2022 had declared an earlier unauthorised structure unlawful and ordered its demolition, the respondents demolished two existing mud structures (used as a storeroom and for traditional ceremonies) and began constructing a new brick structure in 2023 without consulting or engaging the owner. The Land Claims Court dismissed the owner’s application, treating it mainly as contempt proceedings and finding no wilful contempt. The owner appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld. The order of the Land Claims Court was set aside and replaced with an order declaring the 2023 structure unlawful, directing the first to fourth respondents to demolish it and remove building materials within 30 days, authorising the sheriff to do so if they failed to comply, and ordering each party to pay its own costs.

The case clarifies the limits of occupiers’ rights under ESTA following Daniels v Scribante. It confirms that while consent is not required for necessary improvements to secure human dignity, occupiers must engage meaningfully with landowners and may not demolish and rebuild structures unilaterally. It reinforces the balance between occupiers’ tenure security and owners’ constitutional property rights.