Question 2

“In the case of City of Johannesburg v Changing Tides 74(Pty)Ltd and others (2012)
6 SA 294(SCA)”,

FACTS

“The facts involved an eviction application by the City of Johannesburg against

residents of an informal settlement”.i The city claimed that the occupants should be
evicted as they were using the land illegally.

Legal Question:
“The legal question centered how courts should approach eviction applications and
what factors it should be considered”. The court must decide what criteria should be
used when determining whether to issue an eviction order.

Ratio Decidendi:
“The ratio decidendi emphasizes that, in light of the fact that property is not absolute,
courts should weigh the rights to housing and property equally. The public interest,
alternative accommodations, and the vulnerability of the affected individuals should
all be considered by the courts. The ruling emphasized that accommodations must
be provided by both public and private organizations, especially when they impact
communities or vulnerable individuals”.ii
The court has already decided that the grant of eviction order against the occupiers
is just and equitable and, most importantly, the occupiers do not appeal against that
decision.

In this particular case, the court determined that the occupiers had to establish a
community on the land since they had been there for an extended period of time.
The occupiers' entitlement to housing had been recognized by the court, which also
acknowledged that their removal would leave them without a place to live.The
landowner's lack of development or use of the land was another factor taken into
consideration by the court.

Conclusion:

“The case demonstrated that eviction proceedings require a comprehensive

approach that considers the various rights at play as well as the larger societal
context.” The state and private landowners have an obligation to provide homes and
accommodation; their claim to property is not absolute.

i
ChatGtp question 2(0).pdf
ii
ChatGtp question 2 (2).pdf