Theo Dicke (Pty) Ltd v Machete SNR and Another

The applicant, Theo Dicke (Pty) Ltd, is the owner of the Remaining Extent of the farm Spitsrand 422 LT. The first respondent is a long-term occupier under ESTA, entitled to reside on the farm for life, while the second respondent is her granddaughter who lived on the farm as a family member. In late 2011 the second respondent constructed a new brick-and-mortar dwelling on the farm without the applicant’s permission, despite having been refused consent. The applicant sought declaratory and interdictory relief, including an order compelling the second respondent to vacate and demolish the new dwelling and prohibiting further unauthorised construction.

The second respondent was declared to have acted unlawfully, ordered to vacate and demolish the new dwelling by specified dates, and prohibited from erecting further structures without written permission. The sheriff was authorised to remove her if she failed to comply. The first respondent was interdicted from enabling or assisting unauthorised persons to establish new dwellings. No order as to costs was made.

The case clarifies the limits of residence rights under ESTA, particularly distinguishing between occupiers in their own right and family members of occupiers. It affirms that unauthorised construction on agricultural land may be restrained by interdict without constituting an eviction and reinforces landowners’ rights to control development on their property within the ESTA framework.