Crookes Brothers Limited and Another v Mkololo and Others

The applicants, Crookes Brothers Limited and Crookes Brothers South Africa (Pty) Ltd, owned and managed Ou Werf Farm near Caledon. The first respondent, Mr Zola Eric Mkololo, was employed on the farm and, implicitly through his employment contract, enjoyed a right of residence on the farm. His partner, Ms Cynthia O’Reiley, resided with him, with her right of residence deriving from his employment. Mr Mkololo was dismissed in March 2014 following a disciplinary process related to alcohol offences. The applicants assumed that his dismissal automatically terminated his and Ms O’Reiley’s rights of residence. Over several years, and after substantial unexplained delays, the applicants issued notices purporting to cancel their rights of residence and eventually brought an unopposed eviction application in the Magistrates’ Court in 2019. An eviction order was granted in June 2022. By the time of automatic review under ESTA, Mr Mkololo and Ms O’Reiley had largely moved off the farm for work reasons, but their children and grandchildren continued residing there. The applicants had never taken a separate, procedurally fair decision to terminate the respondents’ rights of residence, nor invited representations before doing so.

The eviction order granted by the Magistrates’ Court was reviewed and set aside. No order as to costs was made.

The case reaffirms and applies Constitutional Court jurisprudence under ESTA that termination of employment does not automatically terminate an occupier’s right of residence. It underscores the requirement of a separate, procedurally fair decision to terminate residence rights, including for family members whose occupation derives from another’s employment. The judgment highlights the importance of procedural fairness and updated factual enquiry in eviction matters, especially where long delays occur.