Belle Vallee Vineyards (Pty) Ltd and Another v Lakey and Others

Belle Vallee Vineyards (Pty) Ltd owns the Soetendal farm. Mr Lakey was employed as a general worker and, in terms of his employment contract and a housing permit, he and his family were allowed to live on the farm only for the duration of his employment. Mrs Lakey was also employed on the farm but did not allege an independent right of residence. Mr Lakey was dismissed in September 2020 following a disciplinary hearing relating to theft of farm property. He did not pursue an unfair dismissal claim under the Labour Relations Act. After his dismissal, the appellants terminated the family’s right of residence and, following a lengthy delay and further correspondence, sought their eviction under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA). The Magistrates’ Court dismissed the eviction application, finding procedural unfairness in the termination of residence, concerns about the fairness of Mr Lakey’s dismissal, and uncertainty regarding the risk of homelessness. The appellants appealed to the Land Court.

The appeal was upheld. The first to seventh respondents were ordered to vacate the property by 31 August 2025, failing which the Sheriff was authorised to evict them after 6 September 2025. The appellants were ordered to pay R20 000 to the respondents after they vacated and to transport the children to and from their current school until the end of the 2025 school year. No order as to costs was made.

The judgment clarifies the relationship between ESTA and the Labour Relations Act, confirming that eviction courts may not re‑litigate the fairness of a dismissal that falls within the labour law framework. It provides guidance on how section 8 of ESTA should be applied where residence is employment‑based, the effect of delays in eviction proceedings, and the treatment of family members of dismissed farmworkers. The case contributes to legal certainty in farm eviction disputes.