Ashanti Wine and Country Estate (Pty) Ltd v Claasen and Others

Ashanti Wine and Country Estate (Pty) Ltd purchased Farm 1731 in 2010. The first to fifty-seventh respondents are ESTA-protected occupiers forming a long‑standing community of approximately 72 people residing in cottages on the farm, many for their entire lives. Their original rights of residence arose from employment with a previous owner when the farm operated as a vineyard. Employment ended in 2006 and the property ceased agricultural operations. Ashanti has since sought to relocate and evict the occupiers, including a prior unsuccessful eviction attempt. In 2018 Ashanti purported to terminate the occupiers’ rights of residence on the basis of an alleged irretrievable breakdown of the relationship under s 10(1)(c) of ESTA. The occupiers were willing to relocate if suitable alternative accommodation with secure tenure could be obtained. Extensive mediation followed, with Ashanti offering R350 000 per household to facilitate relocation, coupled with anticipated state tenure grants under s 4 of ESTA. Despite ongoing efforts, state processes to finalise s 4 tenure grant applications were delayed.

The Court authorised the parties to seek the re‑appointment of a mediator for up to twelve months; directed the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform to finalise the occupiers’ s 4 ESTA grant applications within 60 days; granted Ashanti leave to renew the eviction application on the same papers, supplemented if necessary; and made no order as to costs.

The case highlights the Land Court’s strong emphasis on mediation, state accountability, and the constitutional objectives of ESTA. It illustrates judicial reluctance to grant eviction where meaningful efforts toward secure tenure and alternative accommodation are underway, and underscores the role of s 4 ESTA tenure grants and court‑managed mediation in resolving long‑standing farm occupier disputes.