Occupiers of Erven 87 & 88 Berea v Christiaan Frederick De Wet N.O.

The applicants were 184 low-income occupiers of a block of flats on erven 87 and 88, Berea, Johannesburg, some residing there for up to 26 years. The property was sold by liquidators to a purchaser intending to refurbish it. Eviction proceedings were instituted under PIE. On 10 September 2013, the High Court granted an eviction order purportedly by consent after a small group of occupiers and a ward committee member appeared unrepresented in court. The occupiers later contended that they had only mandated those present to seek a postponement to obtain legal representation, were unaware of their constitutional and statutory rights, and had not given informed consent. Applications for rescission and leave to appeal failed in the High Court and SCA. The occupiers then approached the Constitutional Court seeking rescission of the eviction order.

Leave to appeal was granted and the appeal upheld. The eviction order granted on 10 September 2013 was rescinded. The matter was remitted to the High Court for expedited case management. The City of Johannesburg was joined as a respondent and directed to file a report on the availability of alternative land or emergency accommodation. No order as to costs was made.

The case affirms that judicial oversight in eviction matters under section 26(3) of the Constitution and PIE cannot be bypassed by purported consent. It strengthens procedural protections for unlawful occupiers, clarifies the requirement of informed consent, and confirms the duty of courts to join municipalities and consider homelessness even where eviction orders are sought or granted by agreement.