CaseNotes LogoCaseNotes
  • Home
  • Library
  • Research
  • Discussion Hub
  • Wiki
  • Latin Dictionary
  • Question Bank
  • Settings
S

Student

Student Account

South African Law • Jurisdictional Corpus
HomeLibraryResearchQuestionsSettings
Judicial Precedent
Ask AI

Port Elizabeth Municipality v Various Occupiers

Citation2005 (1) SA 217 (CC); Case CCT 53/03
JurisdictionZA
Area of Law
Constitutional LawProperty Law
Free account

Get the most out of this judgment

Create a free CaseNotes account to save this case, see how it's cited, get an AI summary, and search 10,000+ SA judgments.

Create free accountor sign in
Housing Rights
Eviction Law

Facts of the Case

The Port Elizabeth Municipality sought an eviction order against 68 people (including 23 children) occupying 29 shacks on privately-owned land in Lorraine, responding to a petition signed by 1,600 residents and the landowners. The occupiers had lived there for periods ranging from two to eight years, most having been previously evicted from other land. They erected structures without municipal consent. They indicated willingness to move if given reasonable notice and suitable alternative land, rejecting the Municipality's proposal to relocate to Walmer Township (which they claimed was crime-ridden, overcrowded, and offered no security of tenure). The occupiers had not applied for housing through the municipal housing programme. The High Court granted the eviction order. The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) overturned this, holding that the Municipality had not shown the occupiers would have security of tenure at Walmer. The Municipality then appealed to the Constitutional Court.

Legal Issues

  • Whether it is just and equitable to grant an eviction order under section 6 of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 (PIE)
  • The interpretation of section 26(3) of the Constitution (right not to be evicted without a court order considering all relevant circumstances)
  • The relationship between property rights (section 25) and housing rights (section 26) of the Constitution
  • Whether municipalities seeking eviction must provide alternative accommodation or land
  • The circumstances under which courts should consider mediation in eviction proceedings
  • The obligations of municipalities under section 26 of the Constitution when seeking evictions

Judicial Outcome

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The SCA judgment setting aside the eviction order was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi

When a municipality seeks eviction of unlawful occupiers under section 6 of PIE, a court may only grant an eviction order if it is "just and equitable" to do so after considering all relevant circumstances, including: (1) the circumstances under which occupation occurred; (2) the duration of occupation; and (3) the availability of suitable alternative accommodation or land. Before seeking eviction, municipalities must meaningfully engage with occupiers, treating them with dignity and making reasonable efforts to explore solutions. Courts should be reluctant to grant eviction orders where: (a) occupiers have resided on land for a substantial period; (b) the land is not needed for immediate use; (c) the occupiers are genuinely homeless and in need; (d) the municipality has made no significant attempt to understand the occupiers' circumstances or explore alternatives; and (e) no meaningful engagement or mediation has been attempted. The constitutional rights to property (section 25) and housing (section 26) must be balanced, with eviction proceedings interpreted through the values of human dignity, equality and ubuntu.

Obiter Dicta

Sachs J made important observations on mediation in eviction proceedings, suggesting that courts have power to order mediation even where not expressly provided for in PIE, as part of ensuring a "just and equitable" outcome. He emphasized that "compulsory mediation" means compulsory participation in the process, not compulsory settlement. The judgment contains extensive obiter on the history of forced removals and the Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act (PISA), emphasizing how PIE represents a fundamental transformation from apartheid-era law. Sachs J discussed the concept of ubuntu and its role in constitutional interpretation, stating it "is a unifying motif of the Bill of Rights" emphasizing human interdependence, respect and concern. The judgment notes that some legal problems based on contradictory values cannot be "solved" with "correct" answers but can only be managed more or less well - the role of courts is to balance competing interests in as just a manner as possible. The Court observed that while there is no absolute duty to provide alternative accommodation, courts should generally be reluctant to grant eviction against settled occupiers unless satisfied a reasonable alternative is available.

Legal Significance

This is a landmark judgment in South African housing and eviction law. It established the principle of "meaningful engagement" - that municipalities must engage with unlawful occupiers before seeking eviction, treating them with dignity and exploring reasonable alternatives. The judgment confirms that property rights are not absolute and must be balanced against housing rights and human dignity. It emphasizes that eviction proceedings are not merely technical property disputes but involve fundamental human rights requiring courts to exercise wide discretion based on justice and equity. The judgment promotes mediation and alternative dispute resolution in eviction matters. It transformed the approach to evictions from the apartheid-era focus on swift removal to a constitutionally-informed process centered on dignity, fairness and engagement. The decision has had profound influence on subsequent eviction cases and municipal policies regarding informal settlements.

Case relationship graph

Case Network

Explore 59 related cases • Click to navigate

Current Case
Related Case

Cited By 53 Cases

  • Abahlali baseMjondolo Movement SA and Another v Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal and Others(CCT 12/09) [2009] ZACC 31
    Applies

    Applied the principle that reasonable engagement is required in evictions under the PIE Act and section 26(2) of the Constitution.

  • African Christian Democratic Party v The Electoral Commission and OthersCCT 10/06
    Follows

    Used to support that interpretation of legislation gives rise to a constitutional matter within this Court's jurisdiction.

  • Annie Hendricks v Margaret Hendricks & others(20519/14) [2015] ZASCA 165 (25 November 2015)
    Applies

    The court applies the principles from this case regarding the meaning of 'just and equitable' in s 4(7) of PIE Act, requiring an enquiry beyond technical land…

  • Barnett and Others v Minister of Land Affairs and Others(304/06) [2007] ZASCA 95
    Applies

    Applied for the principle that section 26(3) of the Constitution evinces special constitutional regard for a person's place of abode as a zone of personal…

Practice This Case

Sign up to practise IRAC analysis, issue spotting, and argument building on this case.

  • Chiwombererwa Patrick Mapfumo and Esther Mapfumo v Divvyland Investments (Pvt) Limited and OthersHH 501-22, HC 6891/21 (Ref: HC 6567/17)
    Cites

    Cited by the applicants in support of their position that the court should recognise and protect occupiers' rights from arbitrary eviction even from the owner…

  • City of Harare v Tawanda Mukungurutse and OthersSC 46/18 (Civil Appeal No. SC 603/16)
    Cites

    The court cites this case in a footnote for the definition or understanding of 'home' in the constitutional context.

  • City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v Blue Moonlight Properties 39 (Pty) Ltd and Occupiers of Saratoga Avenue(CCT 37/11) [2011] ZACC 33
    Applies

    Cited for the principle that eviction must be just and equitable, balance competing interests and not result in homelessness; applied the concept of ubuntu.

  • City of Johannesburg v Changing Tides 74 (Pty) Ltd and 97 others (The Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa intervening as amicus curiae)(735/2011) [2012] ZASCA 116 (14 September 2012)
    Applies

    Applied in determining that the court must have regard to all relevant factors and confirmed that alternative accommodation is a crucial factor in assessing…

  • City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another v Summer Season Trading 63 (Pty) Ltd[2026] ZASCA 81
    Cites

    CITES – relied upon for the principle that courts should be reluctant to grant eviction against settled occupiers without a reasonable alternative.

  • David Dikoko v Thupi Zacharia MokhatlaCase CCT 62/05 (decided 3 August 2006)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that ubuntu is intrinsic to and constitutive of constitutional culture and suffuses the whole constitutional order.

  • Dreyer & Dreyer CC v Masiteng and OthersLanC: 03R/2025 (Magistrate's Court Case No: 140/2022)
    Applies

    Applied for the principles that availability of suitable alternative accommodation is something to which regard must be had, not an inflexible requirement, and…

  • Economic Freedom Fighters and Another v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Another[2020] ZACC 25
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that land reform must occur within the bounds of the Constitution.

  • Elankor SES (Pty) Ltd v Mzwandile Ngcosholo and OthersCase No. LCC 31R/2006
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that a court should be reluctant to grant an eviction against relatively settled occupiers unless satisfied that a reasonable…

  • Everfresh Market Virginia (Pty) Limited v Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Limited(CCT 105/10) [2011] ZACC 30
    Cites

    Cited for discussion of ubuntu as a constitutional value.

  • Evison Zuze v The Trustees of Bongayi Rushworth Mlambo and Jealous MarimudzaSC 69/2019 (Case No. SC 438/18)
    Cites

    Cited for the observation that the Constitution imposes new obligations on courts concerning rights relating to property and counterposes the normal rights of…

  • Franco Lee v Petrus Johannes Merwe van RensburgLCC Case No: 04R/2016
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that in social legislation courts need to infuse elements of grace and compassion and balance competing interests in a principled way…

  • Gees v The Provincial Minister of Cultural Affairs and Sport, Western Cape(974/2015) [2015] ZASCA 136 (29 September 2016)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that the exercise of ownership rights must take into account the social function of property and obligations to the community.

  • Governing Body of the Juma Musjid Primary School and Others v Ahmed Asruff Essay N.O. and Others(CCT 29/10) [2011] ZACC 13
    Applies

    Applied to explain the role of courts when confronted with competing rights, namely to balance and reconcile opposed claims taking into account all the…

  • Grobler v Phillips and Others[2022] ZACC 32
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that PIE was enacted to ensure evictions take place in a manner consistent with the values of the new constitutional dispensation and…

  • Head of Department, Department of Education, Free State Province v Welkom High School and Others[2013] ZACC 25
    Cites

    Cited for the recognition of participation and engagement related to protection from arbitrary eviction.

  • Head of Department: Mpumalanga Department of Education and Another v Hoërskool Ermelo and Another(CCT 40/09) [2009] ZACC 32
    Cites

    Cited as an example of this Court fashioning structural interdicts or supervisory orders.

  • Hugh Arnold Wormald N.O. and Others v Lungiswa Snowy KambuleCase no: 524/2004 (SCA); also reported as Wormald NO and Others v Kambule [2004] 3 All SA 392 (E)
    Applies

    Applied extensively for Sachs J's guidance on the meaning of 'just and equitable' in PIE, the court's duty to engage in active judicial management, and the…

  • Jabulani Zulu and 389 Others v eThekwini Municipality and Others[2014] ZACC 17
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that PIE and this Court's jurisprudence must be considered when determining the correctness or otherwise of an eviction order.

  • Jaftha v Schoeman and Others; Van Rooyen v Stoltz and OthersCCT 74/03, decided 8 October 2004
    Cites

    Cited for its discussion of apartheid legislation dealing with the occupation of land.

  • Jakobus Petrus Marais N.O. and Others v Jacques Daniels and Others (and related cases)LCC 130/2023; LCC 63/2023; LCC 98/2023; LCC 27/2023; LCC 145/2022; LCC 163/2023; LCC 162/2023; LCC 105/2024 (Land Court)
    Applies

    The Court applies PE Municipality on the judicial function in eviction matters to balance opposed claims justly, endorses court-ordered mediation, and notes…

  • Johanna Malan v City of Cape Town(CCT 143/13) [2014] ZACC 25
    Applies

    The Court applies Port Elizabeth Municipality's approach to eviction proceedings, including the requirement for meaningful engagement, consideration of all…

  • Johannes Nicolaas Jacobs and Others v Christiaan Bester and OthersCase number not provided in judgment - Worcester Magistrate's Court, eviction order dated 20 October 2022, automatic review heard 10 January 2023
    Applies

    The court applies the principle that section 26(3) of the Constitution evinces special constitutional regard for a person's place of abode, acknowledging that…

  • Machele and Others v Mailula and Others[2009] ZACC 7
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (PIE) was adopted to ensure that evictions take…

  • Masotha Hezekia Ngwenya and Others v Grow and More (Pty) Ltd and OthersCase number: 2025-168480 (Land Court, Randburg, delivered 12 March 2026)
    Applies

    Applied the principle of balancing competing interests in a principled way to promote the constitutional vision of a caring society based on good…

  • Mathale v Linda and Another[2015] ZACC 38
    Applies

    Applied to explain that a home is a zone of personal intimacy and family security, and that courts should hesitate to grant evictions where homelessness would…

  • Meadow Glen Home Owners Association v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality(767/2013) [2014] ZASCA 209 (1 December 2014)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that courts are called upon to engage in active judicial management according to equitable principles of ongoing social processes, with…

  • Minister of Health and Professor D McIntyre NO v New Clicks South Africa (Pty) Ltd and OthersCCT 59/04; 2005 (2) SA 530 (CC)
    Cites

    Cited for context of uneven development in South Africa

  • Mkontwana v Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality and Others2005 (1) SA 530 (CC); 2005 (2) BCLR 150 (CC); CCT 57/03, CCT 61/03, CCT 1/04
    Cites

    Cited regarding the eviction rights of municipalities under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act.

  • Mona Glen Farming (Pty) Ltd v Ayanda Nzimande and OthersLanC 117/2025 (Land Court, Randburg, delivered 27 November 2025)
    Applies

    Court applies the principle that in land-related disputes, the court is called upon to go beyond its normal functions and engage in active judicial management,…

  • Ncholo Trust v Johannes Mphofu and Queen TshabalalaLCC 6R/2014 (Magistrate Court Modimole Case No: 1741/13)
    Applies

    The court applies Sachs J's interpretation of the phrase 'just and equitable' under PIE, holding that these principles are equally applicable to ESTA matters…

  • Occupiers of 51 Olivia Road, Berea Township, and 197 Main Street, Johannesburg v City of Johannesburg(CCT 24/07) [2008] ZACC 1
    Applies

    The Court applies the principle from Port Elizabeth Municipality on the need for respectful face-to-face engagement or mediation as a dignified and effective…

  • Old Abland (Pty) Ltd v Hanekom and Others; Old Abland (Pty) Ltd v Jacobs and OthersCase No: LCC178/2016 and LCC179/2016
    Follows

    Constitutional Court authority applied for the principles on how courts should determine a 'just and equitable' eviction, requiring the court to consider…

  • Philippus Petrus Van Der Merwe N.O. and Others v Andrew Stoffels and OthersLanC 2025-032788 (Magistrate Court Case No: 1355/23)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that the judicial function in eviction matters is to balance out and reconcile opposed claims in a just manner, taking account of all…

  • Piketberg Sunrise Farm (Pty) Ltd and Another v Menas and OthersCase No: LCC18R2024 (Magistrate Case No: 205/2023)
    Applies

    Applied for the interpretation of 'just and equitable' as requiring courts to go beyond normal functions and engage in active judicial management according to…

  • Piketberg Sunrise Farm (Pty) Ltd and Another v Niklaas Menas and OthersLCC18R2024 (Magistrate Case No: 205/2023)
    Follows

    The court adopts Sachs J's reasoning in PE Municipality that 'just and equitable' requires close analysis of factual specifics, going beyond technical land law…

  • Road Accident Fund v Mohohlo(882/16) [2017] ZASCA 155
    Cites

    Cited for the constitutional value of ubuntu combining individual rights with a communitarian philosophy.

  • Rowland and Others v Logos Carriers CC(376/2024) [2026] ZASCA 36 (24 March 2026)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that an attempt at mediation is ordinarily a precondition for a just and equitable eviction.

  • Salem Party Club v Salem Community(20626/14) [2016] ZASCA 203 (13 December 2016)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that courts are called upon to engage in active judicial management according to equitable principles in certain constitutional…

  • Sandvliet Boerdery (Pty) Ltd v Maria Mampies & another(107/2018) [2019] ZASCA 100 (8 July 2019)
    Cites

    Cited alongside Hattingh to describe the judicial function in balancing and reconciling opposed claims in eviction cases, taking account of all interests…

  • Schubart Park Residents' Association and Others v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another(CCT 23/12) [2012] ZACC 26
    Applies

    Court applies PE Municipality's principles on meaningful engagement between parties, dignified treatment of occupiers, and the need to avoid stereotyping…

  • Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Limited v Member of the Executive Council for Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Eastern Cape and Others[2015] ZACC 23
    Cites

    The Court cites PE Municipality to illustrate the history of dispossession and the need for our conception of property under the Constitution to include…

  • Tawanda Mukungurutse and Others v City of Harare and AnotherHH 558-16, HC 7694/15
    Distinguishes

    First respondent relied on this case to argue that the illegally erected structures cannot be defined as homes, but the court found that the applicants…

  • The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others v Occupiers [of Portion 971 of the Farm Randjesfontein No 405] and Others(636/23) [2024] ZASCA 47 (23 April 2025)
    Cites

    Cited for the history of evictions under apartheid and the enactment of the PIE Act following constitutional democracy.

  • The Occupiers of Erven 101, 102, 104 and 112, Shorts Retreat, Pietermaritzburg v Daisy Dear Investments (Pty) Ltd(245/08) [2009] ZASCA 80
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that s 7 of PIE is facilitative and that courts should order mediation in appropriate circumstances to ensure a just and equitable…

  • The Occupiers, Shulana Court, 11 Hendon Road, Yeoville, Johannesburg v Mark Lewis Steele(102/09 and 499/09) [2010] ZASCA 28 (25 March 2010)
    Applies

    Applied to establish the court's obligation to consider all relevant circumstances and to be fully apprised of information before granting an eviction order;…

  • The Union of Refugee Women and Others v The Director: The Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority and OthersCase CCT 39/06, decided on 12 December 2006
    Cites

    Cited for the spirit of ubuntu-botho as a unifying motif of the Bill of Rights emphasizing human interdependence, respect and concern.

  • Timothy Maluleke N.O. (in his capacity as trustee of the Hlaniki Trust) v Daniel Phellimon Sibanyoni and Others(1012/2020) [2022] ZASCA 40 (04 April 2022)
    Applies

    The court applies the analysis of the phrase 'just and equitable' from this judgment, adopting Sachs J's reasoning that the criteria to be applied are not…

  • Trustees for the Time Being of the Biowatch Trust v Registrar, Genetic Resources and Others[2009] ZACC 14
    Cites

    Court cites this case as an example of important public interest litigation concerning the rights of the homeless.

  • Explore More Cases

    More Constitutional Law cases

    • (1) Petros Makaza (2) Golden Nhika v The State and (1) Khumbuzo Gumbo (2) Sydney Ndachengedzwa v The StateCCZ 16/17 (Const. Application No. CCZ 5/13 and Const. Application No. CCZ 102/13)
    • (1) Tungamirai Madzokere (2) Lazarus Maengahama (3) Stanford Maengahama (4) Phineous Nhatarikwa (5) Stanford Mangwiro (6) Yvonne Musarurwa (7) Rebecca Mafukeni v The StateSC 8/12; Civil Application No. 318/11
    • 68 Wolmarans Street Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tufh Limited(1263/2022) [2024] ZASCA 48 (15 April 2024)
    • AAA Investments (Proprietary) Limited v The Micro Finance Regulatory Council and Another2006 (11) BCLR 1255 (CC) (also reported as CCT 51/05)
    • Aaron Musiteyi v The StateHMT 2-21, B 09/21
    • Abahlali baseMjondolo Movement SA and Another v Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal and Others(CCT 12/09) [2009] ZACC 31
    • AB and Another v Minister of Social Development[2016] ZACC 43
    • AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others[2020] ZACC 12

    More South Africa cases

    • 3M South Africa (Pty) Ltd v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service(272/09) [2010] ZASCA 20 (23 March 2010)
    • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (04 February 2026)
    • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Nicholas Ngwanammoto Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (4 February 2026)
    • 4-Tune Investments (Pty) Ltd v Kingsgate Body CorporateCSOS 4565/WC/22 (Adjudication Order, 29 November 2023)
    • 68 Wolmarans Street Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tufh Limited(1263/2022) [2024] ZASCA 48 (15 April 2024)
    • 9 on Rydal Vale Court Body Corporate v Pan African Holdings Pty LtdCSOS-4563/KZN/23 (Adjudication Order, 8 November 2023)
    • AAA Investments (Proprietary) Limited v The Micro Finance Regulatory Council and Another
    2006 (11) BCLR 1255 (CC) (also reported as CCT 51/05)
  • A A Alloy Foundry (Pty) Limited v Titaco Projects (Pty) LimitedCase No. 309/97