REPUBLIC OF South Africa
in the high court of south africa
gauteng local division, johannesburg

Case No: 10264/2020

REPORTABLE: YES / NO
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
REVISED.
9/06/21

In the matter between:

CITY OF EKURHULENI METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY 	APPLICANT

and

THE UNLAWFUL OCCUPIERS OF THE IMMOVABLE
PROPERTY AT PORTION 102, HOLGATFONTEIN 326
IR, NIGEL, also known as MACKENZIEVILLE EXT 2	1ST RESPONDENT

CITY OF EKURHULENI METROPOLITAN 
POLICE DEPARTMENT (“SAPS”)				2ND RESPONDENT
SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES 
(“EMPD”)								3RD RESPONDENT
TIFFANY BARNARD (MS)					 	 4TH RESPONDENT 
NONHLANHLA MKHALIPHI (MRS)				 5TH RESPONDENT
BRENDA OCTAVIA MKHALIPHI (MS)				 6TH RESPONDENT
B J WILLARD (MR)					 	 	 7TH RESPONDENT
SHARM ROGERS (MR)						 8TH RESPONDENT
HANS KAYSTER (MR) 						 9TH RESPONDENT
LETOYA GIBBS (MS) 						10TH RESPONDENT
SANA PRETORIUS (MRS) 					11TH RESPONDENT
J CEASER (MR) 							12TH RESPONDENT
JEANY NKOSI (MRS)						 13TH RESPONDENT
GABRIEL LOTTERING (MR) 					14TH RESPONDENT
ALLAN JOSEPH FORTUIN (MR)					 15TH RESPONDENT
ALISTAIRE CLIVE MMULLE					 16TH RESPONDENT
CHESLIN WINSTON ADAMS 					 17TH RESPONDENT 
LUCIAN GALLON							 18TH RESPONDENT 
TSHEHLA KHUSTO SQUATE 				 	 19TH RESPONDENT 
DELICIA BAMBISA 						20TH RESPONDENT 
MZWAKHE LAWRENCE HLOPHE 				21ST RESPONDENT 
WAHIED ELIE 							22ND RESPONDENT 
CHANTELL LEACH 						23RD RESPONDENT 
DERIO MARK LOUWSKITTER 					24TH RESPONDENT 
ELLAINE BEVERLEY MOPP 					25TH RESPONDENT 
ALRANE JULIAN BRANDT 					26TH RESPONDENT
CRYSTAL VAN WYK 						27TH RESPONDENT 
GERALDINE KATRIENA MITCHELL 				28TH RESPONDENT 
LUCY TSOTETSI 							29TH RESPONDENT 
MARIA SCHROEDER 						30TH RESPONDENT
SHARON MICHELLE CROTZ 					31ST RESPONDENT 
CLEOPATRA LIVOIDIA KIKIA 					32ND RESPONDENT 
SHIRLY-ANN SHOEMONE ESBEND 				33RD RESPONDENT 
JENNIFER WENDY DIENIE 					 34TH RESPONDENT 
FARZAANA MANGERA						 35TH RESPONDENT 
MARRIAM JINA 							 36TH RESPONDENT
PHAKISO THABANA 						 37TH RESPONDENT 
NATASHA BETTY WATSON 					 38TH RESPONDENT 
THANDEKA FOURIE 						 39TH RESPONDENT
INALEE CHIRENE MALO 						 40TH RESPONDENT 
MBALI SHARON MAIMELA 					 41ST RESPONDENT 
SARAIT GEORGE 							 42ND RESPONDENT 
JEROME BADENHORST 						 43RD RESPONDENT 
YVONNE COETZEE 						 44TH RESPONDENT
RASHAAD IQBAL HASSIM					 45THRESPONDENT KEVIN EDWIN ATLEE 						 46TH RESPONDENT 
HOLLITTO PAUL D’ALMEIDA 					 47TH RESPONDENT 
THOBEKA MAHLANGU 						 48TH RESPONDENT 
BRANDON MARTIN RICHARDS 				 49TH RESPONDENT 
ALRANE BRANDT 							 50TH RESPONDENT 
REAGAN GRANT SALLIE 					 51ST RESPONDENT 
BERENICE ETHNE PETERSON 					 52ND RESPONDENT 
NICO FRANCIS 							 53RD RESPONDENT 
KYLE MULLER 							 54TH RESPONDENT
LOUIS PRECIOUS HERMANUS 					 55TH RESPONDENT 
REAGEN WALTER BEKKER 					 56TH RESPONDENT 
SUZETTE PEACOCK 						 57TH RESPONDENT 
FELICIA MERCIA PEAHBHAY 					 58TH RESPONDENT 
STELLA LAURA JOUBERT 					 59TH RESPONDENT 
PATRICIA BOSMAN 						 60TH RESPONDENT 
ELBERINA STEYN 						 61ST RESPONDENT 
ELTON KING 							 62ND RESPONDENT 
SHANE ZAAN BRANDT 						 63RD RESPONDENT PIETHERMANES FILANDER 					 64TH RESPONDENT QUINTON VAN WYK						 65TH RESPONDENT 
WYOLIN WENNAAR 						 66TH RESPONDENT 
LEON PILLAY 							 67TH RESPONDENT 
JULIUS CEASER 							 68TH RESPONDENT 
VIVIEN HUMAN 							 69TH RESPONDENT 
JACQUES MEYER 							 70TH RESPONDENT 
VIDONIA NADIA KLEIN						 71ST RESPONDENT 
SAUL ROOI 								 72ND RESPONDENT 
JOHN JACOBS 							 73RD RESPONDENT 
ERNEST MAKHUBO						 74TH RESPONDENT 
LIZZY SMITH 							 75TH RESPONDENT 
DOYI LETTIE ZWANE 						 76TH RESPONDENT 
ANDRE ALEXANDER 						 77TH RESPONDENT 
MALCOM CLYDE SMITH 						 78TH RESPONDENT 
ANUSHCAR KLEIN 						 79TH RESPONDENT 
THANDIWE MEFANE 						 80TH RESPONDENT 
FATIMA SCHROEDER 						 81ST RESPONDENT 
QUEENIE MARKGRAAF 						 82ND RESPONDENT 
JOAN BHAQA 							 83RD RESPONDENT 
DAVID WAGNER 							 84TH RESPONDENT TEBOGO TSHELO 							 85TH RESPONDENT ANNA LINA FRANCIS 						 86TH RESPONDENT
BONGANI JAMES NAPE						 87TH RESPONDENT 
MORNE KELLY 							 88TH RESPONDENT CHRISTINE ABRAHAMS 						 89TH RESPONDENT SHELDON BADENHORST 					 90TH RESPONDENT RASHEED JEREMIAH 						 91ST RESPONDENT REAGAN GRANT SALLI 						 92ND RESPONDENT 
HENDRIK VAN HEERDEN 					 93RD RESPONDENT 
QUINTON WEBB 							 94TH RESPONDENT 
LUCAS JOHANNESBATES 					 95TH RESPONDENT 
GRAHAM GRAY							 96TH RESPONDENT 
ELIZABETH JOUBERT 						 97TH RESPONDENT
 MBALI MAPHALALA 						 98TH RESPONDENT 
LYDIA ROOS							 99TH RESPONDENT 
RICARDO SWARTZ 						 100TH RESPONDENT 
RAQUEL BROOKS 						 101ST RESPONDENT 
VANESSA WILLIAMS 						 102ND RESPONDENT 
DANIEL MOHAPI 							 103RD RESPONDENT 
DORAH VAN BILION 						 104TH RESPONDENT 
NATALIE SNYDERS 						 105TH RESPONDENT 
WILLBA CATHERINE SELINDER 				 106TH RESPONDENT 
WARLIED BANOO 							 107TH RESPONDENT 
BERENICE SWATZ 						 108TH RESPONDENT 
LORENZO LOUW 							 109TH RESPONDENT 
SHERYLENE LOUW	 					 110TH RESPONDENT 
FABIAN ZIEGERS 							 111TH RESPONDENT 
RIAAZ ABDULLA GUMAN 					 112TH RESPONDENT 
OCTAVIA ROUX 							 113TH RESPONDENT
 LEEBAN ROUX 							 114TH RESPONDENT 
MEGAN WEBB 							 115TH RESPONDENT 
SAMANTHA ABRAHAMS 					 116TH RESPONDENT 
MARCOLENE WEBB 						 117TH RESPONDENT
GERONIMO LOUW							 118TH RESPONDENT
AZELIA FARLENE SOUTHEN					 119TH RESPONDENT
RONA HOWARD							 120TH RESPONDENT
M DEJONG								 121ST RESPONDENT
LINDIWE NGUZA							 122ND RESPONDENT
THULANI BUTHELEZI						 123RD R ESPONDENT
PHUMZILE LIZZY MNUNE					 124TH RESPONDENT
ALIDA WANDA POST						 125TH RESPONDENT
SHANEE DANIELLE						 126TH RESPONDENT
DION SAMUEL JAMES HARRISON				 127TH RESPONDENT
NKOSINATHI WILFRED NKOSI					 128TH RESPONDENT
ISOLONE MICHELLE KENNY					 129TH RESPONDENT
FIONA MARTIN							 130TH RESPONDENT
ROBIN DIANE ADAMS						 131ST RESPONDENT
SAMUEL BROWN							 132ND RESPONDENT
JAUNITA SYLVIA BEUKES					 133RD RESPONDENT
JACK ISAACS							 134TH RESPONDENT
REGGIE CRISTJAN MOLEFE					 135TH RESPONDENT
DOWNWAY STUURMAN						136TH RESPONDENT
THADEUS DUBER							137TH RESPONDENT
SHEREEZ BEYERS						138TH RESPONDENT
RENE’ BEYERS							139TH RESPONDENT
INGRID KOEKEMOER						140TH RESPONDENT
TLOU FRANS KGOMO						141ST RESPONDENT
PUTI PHINEAS KGOMO						142ND RESPONDENT
MADIMETJA STEPHEN NONG					143RD RESPONDENT
LESLEY JOHN MALONEY					144TH RESPONDENT
SHIELA STOMPIE ESAU						145TH RESPONDENT
MBALI MAPHALALA						146TH RESPONDENT
SONIA PATIENCE JENLLEE NAIDOO				147TH RESPONDENT
EDWIN SAMUELS							148TH RESPONDENT
PERSERVERENCE MAHLANGU				149TH RESPONDENT
BRENDON EPHRAIM KOCK					150TH RESPONDENT
LUCY DIPUO TSOTETSI						151ST RESPONDENT
GERT JOHANNES BLOCK					152ND RESPONDENT
KLARA IRENE FELICITY GEORGE				153RD RESPONDENT
BUSI CINDY MTSWENI						154TH RESPONDENT
RUAN BRANDON HOWARD					155TH RESPONDENT
CAROL ANNE CAROLS						156TH RESPONDENT
OSWILL BEYERS							157TH RESPONDENT
BEN SPEELMAN							158TH RESPONDENT
KARIEM ROOS							159TH RESPONDENT
BANELE NGWENYA						160TH RESPONDENT
RANDALL THOMPSON MABASO				161ST RESPONDENT
JOSEPH MAPOTO							162ND RESPONDENT
PERSERVERANCE JEANINE MABASO			163RD RESPONDENT
DUDUZILE REJOICE NENE					164TH RESPONDENT
RENE BEYERS							165TH RESPONDENT
CHARMAINE BEYERS						166TH RESPONDENT
RINA SWARTS							167TH RESPONDENT
ALLEGRO WILLARD						168TH RESPONDENT
SHADRACK MOKOENA						169TH RESPONDENT
GERTRUIDA JAARS						170TH RESPONDENT
MATHEW BERGMAN						180TH RESPONDENT
MARIA TSHABANGU						181ST RESPONDENT
EUGENE SAAL							182ND RESPONDENT
SONTO SABA							183RD RESPONDENT
ANTHONY MORRIS						184TH RESPONDENT
BUSISIWE MFAKU							185TH RESPONDENT
MAGGIE THANDY MAKHOBA					186TH RESPONDENT
ANDREA MAANSDORP						187TH RESPONDENT
SEVRIANO MARRICK BENTLEY				188TH RESPONDENT
FRANKLIN DAVIDS						189TH RESPONDENT
EMLYN SMITH							190TH RESPONDENT
MAHALI BRENDA MATLALI					191ST RESPONDENT
SENZO LOUIS MASEKO						192ND RESPONDENT
CAMPHERDANICA BROWN					193RD RESPONDENT
NHLANHLA VINOLIA MTIMUNYE				194TH RESPONDENT
IVAN FRANK MORRIS						195TH RESPONDENT
FARREL MARTIN							196TH RESPONDENT
DIEGO PROBET							197TH RESPONDENT
SALOME WHITNEY SMITH					198TH RESPONDENT
SOPHIE MARTHA MKALIPE					199TH RESPONDENT
BETTY MATSHIGA							200TH RESPONDENT
SHAULLIN GILBERT						201ST RESPONDENT
ZELDA CONSTANCE BRENDA ROOS				202ND RESPONDENT
ANDILE SHABALALA						203RD RESPONDENT
CHARMAINE ROOS						204TH RESPONDENT
ASHRIFF SHARIEF GUMAN					205TH RESPONDENT
KHAVELA TSUMANE						206TH RESPONDENT
PREVEIN FRANK VOLMINK					207TH RESPONDENT
THABISILE PRECIOUS PULE					208TH RESPONDENT
RICARDO DELLANO VISAGIE					209TH RESPONDENT
MALCOLM CLYDE SMITH					210TH RESPONDENT
PHUMZILE LIZZY MNUNI						211TH RESPONDENT
ANDRE ALEXANDER						212TH RESPONDENT
HENRIETTE SWARTS						213TH RESPONDENT
CLEODINE NEL							214TH RESPONDENT
ANGELA SMITH							215TH RESPONDENT
BIANCA BADENHORST						216TH RESPONDENT
MARIA KLEINTJIE MOOS					217TH RESPONDENT
NDWAMATO DANIEL PHASWANA				218TH RESPONDENT
PRESTON CHARLES SOLOMONS				219TH RESPONDENT
SIDNEY KHAN							220TH RESPONDENT
BYRON MARCUS							221ST RESPONDENT
JESSICA ROSEMONDE SPEELMAN				222ND RESPONDENT
PATRICIA PHILANDER						223RD RESPONDENT
ANGELIQUE BROOKS						224TH RESPONDENT
DARRYL COX							225TH RESPONDENT
JOHN TSHABALALA						226TH RESPONDENT
BJ WILLIAMS							227TH RESPONDENT
BRAECHELLE WILLARD						228TH RESPONDENT
ROSETTA ROOS							229TH RESPONDENT
LORENZO LOUW							230TH RESPONDENT
LIZELLE MAGDELINE LOUW					231ST RESPONDENT
LABIONDE ANNE LOUW						232ND RESPONDENT
RAIDEN VAN WYK							233RD RESPONDENT
LINDIWE NGUZA							234TH RESPONDENT
EDITH KENNY							235TH RESPONDENT
URSULA PORCIA PETERSON					236TH RESPONDENT
JUSTIN MOOSA BROOKS					237TH RESPONDENT
LETHUKUTHULA SABELO NKOSI				238TH RESPONDENT
THOKOZILE PATRICIA ROUX					239TH RESPONDENT
DOCTOR KLAAS ZWANE						240TH RESPONDENT
STOFFEL RICARDO VAN HEERDEN				241ST RESPONDENT
STEPHANIE SCHALKWYK					242ND RESPONDENT
JAFTA EPHRAIM NKOSI						243RD RESPONDENT
SAUL MARTINS ROOS						244TH RESPONDENT
SHANEE KHAN							245TH RESPONDENT
NATASHA KLARA SKARNEK					246TH RESPONDENT
ANATTIO NHLAPO							247TH RESPONDENT
SAFIRAH MARUPENG MOKWANA				248TH RESPONDENT
RICHMAN NTOKOZA MATHE					249TH RESPONDENT
WONIQUE FERRIS							250TH RESPONDENT
SHANAY KORDOM						251ST RESPONDENT
ANNELINE VAN GREENEN					252ND RESPONDENT
ELROY PEACOCK							253RD RESPONDENT
EUGENIA GOLIATH						254TH RESPONDENT
CELA DE ABREU							255TH RESPONDENT
GOODMAN JOHANNES ZWANE				256TH RESPONDENT
ANGELA VAN DER WESTHUIZEN				257TH RESPONDENT
LINDA THEMBEKA GOVA					258TH RESPONDENT
ESTA MAHLANGU							259TH RESPONDENT
PINKANA EMILY HADEBE					260TH RESPONDENT
LUCHANDRE JANLE CORDELIA MARKGRAAF		261ST RESPONDENT
CHRISTINE THERESA ABRAHAMS				262ND RESPONDENT
KASHIEFA CHARLES						263RD RESPONDENT
NKOSIVEZWE SYDNEY MKONZA				264TH RESPONDENT
LOEKIE NAIDOO							265TH RESPONDENT
TINA MINAAR							266TH RESPONDENT
LAWRENCE ROOS						267TH RESPONDENT
GIOVANNO VERGAEL MOOS					268TH RESPONDENT
SIMONE BROOKS							269TH RESPONDENT
DARIUN MARSHALL						270TH RESPONDENT
CHESTER STEPHEN SOLOMONS				271ST RESPONDENT
ROSSLYN SMITH							272ND RESPONDENT
LYDIA MMAKGONE CHOEU					273RD RESPONDENT
NATASHA BRUMMER						274TH RESPONDENT
THANDIWE ANNAH MEFANE					275TH RESPONDENT
LOUISA PRECIOUS HERMANUS				276TH RESPONDENT
KEAGAN MARCO ROSE						277TH RESPONDENT
EMMANUEL DENNIS SMITH					278TH RESPONDENT
COLIN HENLEY ADRIAN MAY					279TH RESPONDENT
KARIN CLASSEN							280TH RESPONDENT
JESSICA DUANNE LOUWSKITTER				281ST RESPONDENT
GAVA EAGLESTONE 						282ND RESPONDENT
WARREN ANGELO NAIDOO					283RD RESPONDENT
LEAREIL STEFFORD SHAWN					284TH RESPONDENT
DOCTOR KLAAS ZWANE						285TH RESPONDENT
FRANKLIN DAVIDS						286TH RESPONDENT
MARK HAROLD OGLE						287TH RESPONDENT
MPENDULO PROGRESS NZIMANDE				288TH RESPONDENT
DEIDRE PADAYACHEE						289TH RESPONDENT
JOHANNES JOEY WALES					290TH RESPONDENT
CHARDENE’ CLARISSA PADAYACHEE			291ST RESPONDENT
DAVID SMITH							292ND RESPONDENT
JOAN EUNICE KOEKEMOER					293RD RESPONDENT
MAUREEN SMITH							294TH RESPONDENT
MICHAEL DANIEL KOESNEL					295TH RESPONDENT
CHRISTO LOTTERING						296TH RESPONDENT
MARTHA VAN ROSS						297TH RESPONDENT
TANYA ABRAHAMS						298TH RESPONDENT
HENRICO MAANSDORP						299TH RESPONDENT
MARIA NIKLAAI							300TH RESPONDENT
ALISTER THERON							301ST RESPONDENT
ELIZABETH JOUBERT						302ND RESPONDENT
GERTRUIDA JAARS						303RD RESPONDENT
PHUMZILE LIZZY MNUNE					304TH RESPONDENT
HILDA POPPIE MANCHO						305TH RESPONDENT
JOSEPH GEORGE KUNENE					306TH RESPONDENT
THEMBA LEDONGA						307TH RESPONDENT
ANGELA POONEN							308TH RESPONDENT
MAGGIE MASHIYANE						309TH RESPONDENT
MARIA TSHABANGU						310TH RESPONDENT
ANGELIQUE PEACOCK						311TH RESPONDENT
LUCY DIPUO TSOTETSI						312TH RESPONDENT
ELTON KING							313TH RESPONDENT
ESTHER MHLANGU						314TH RESPONDENT
ISOLONE KENNY							315TH RESPONDENT
ELFONZO VAN SCHALKWYK					316TH RESPONDENT
GRAHAM SMALE							317TH RESPONDENT
GERONIMO ENVER LOUW					319TH RESPONDENT
TEVIN FORTUIN							320TH RESPONDENT
MODIEHI THABANA						321ST RESPONDENT
KEAGAN ROSE							322ND RESPONDENT
SHAWN GOLIATH							323RD RESPONDENT
CHESLIN ISAACS							324TH RESPONDENT
DAVID TUKONE							325TH RESPONDENT
DEIDRE HEIDE PADAYACHEE					326TH RESPONDENT
NOMPUMELELO PHIRI						327TH RESPONDENT
CHRISTOPHER VAN SCHALKWYK				328TH RESPONDENT
ERIC SOUTHEN							329TH RESPONDENT
PINKANA HADEBE						330TH RESPONDENT
GENEVIEVE DOEKIES						331ST RESPONDENT
LATOYA ROUX							332ND RESPONDENT
SEROTO SAMUEL MORE					333RD RESPONDENT
URSULA LOUW							334TH RESPONDENT
FABIAN ZIEGERS							335TH RESPONDENT
SIMONE BROOKS							336TH RESPONDENT
ANDRIES ADAMS							337TH RESPONDENT
ARTHUR DINJANA							338TH RESPONDENT
LEONI CAROL LOUWSKITTER					339TH RESPONDENT
SELINA DU PREEZ						340TH RESPONDENT
ELROY PEACOCK							341ST RESPONDENT
TINA MINNAAR							342ND RESPONDENT
ANDREA MAANSDORP						343RD RESPONDENT
LORETTA LOUW							344TH RESPONDENT
VUSUMUZI LETHULI						345TH RESPONDENT
NONHLANHLA MKHALIPI					346TH RESPONDENT
CHENTONIQUE GOLIATH					347TH RESPONDENT
ANGELA SMITH							348TH RESPONDENT
NATASHA BRUMNER						349TH RESPONDENT
ADDEL LOTTIE ABRAHAMS					350TH RESPONDENT
CHADWIN AMIGO 							351ST RESPONDENT
PORTIA BENNET 							352ND RESPONDENT 
AGNES BULELWA BOOI 						353RD RESPONDENT
SIPHAKAMISO BUTHELEZI 					354TH RESPONDENT 
PHUMELELE MEITA BUTHELEZI 				355TH RESPONDENT 
SIPHINDILE BUTHELEZI 						356TH RESPONDENT 
PRETTY NOLUBABACO BAWUTI				357TH RESPONDENT 
ADELAIDE NONHLANHLA CHILWANE			358TH RESPONDENT
NOMAXASIBE BERNIES DUIKER 				359TH RESPONDENT 
ZANDILE GINIZA							360TH RESPONDENT 
JULIA GOMO 							361ST RESPONDENT 
THOKO GUMEDE 							362ND RESPONDENT 
BAISE GODSPHO HADEBE 					363RD RESPONDENT
KHANYISILEMARIA HADEBE 					364TH RESPONDENT 
NONKULULEKO PRECIOUS HLONGWANE 			365TH RESPONDENT
THEMBI PROSPERITE HLATSHWAYO 			366TH RESPONDENT
PETER JABULANE KHANYE 					367TH RESPONDENT
PHILEMON JEMSANA 						368TH RESPONDENT
BOITUMELO KHOZA 						369TH RESPONDENT 
CHARLES KUBHEKA 						370TH RESPONDENT
THEMBI NOMSA KHOZA 						371ST RESPONDENT
MUSA KHUMALO 							372ND RESPONDENT 
ROSE KHUMALO 							373RD RESPONDENT
EVA SALUKWATI KHUMALO 					374TH RESPONDENT
SIBONGILE KHUMALO 						375TH RESPONDENT 
JACK TSHEPO KHAUOE						376TH RESPONDENT
ISMAEL BOY KODISANE 					377TH RESPONDENT 
MUSA BONGI KUBHEKA 					378TH RESPONDENT 
BEKISISA WELLINGTON LANGA 				379TH RESPONDENT 
KHANYISILE DAPHNEY LANGA 				380TH RESPONDENT
THEMBA LEDONGA 						381ST RESPONDENT 
SPHELELE LANGELITHE SASONDO				382ND RESPONDENT 
BRITAIN TSWAANE LETSEDI					383RD RESPONDENT 
MARIA SENQOANE LETSOALO 				384TH RESPONDENT 
STHABISO PHILASANDE MABASO				385TH RESPONDENT 
MERIDON PULEDI MAILULA					386TH RESPONDENT
NOLUTHANDO MABEDLA					387TH RESPONDENT
NKULULEKO MANANA						388TH RESPONDENT 
PRECIOUS PHINDILE MANALENG 				389TH RESPONDENT
ZANELE FLORENCE MAKILE 					390TH RESPONDENT 
LINDIWE MALANGA 						391ST RESPONDENT 
VUYISA MAKEYISI							392ND RESPONDENT 
KGOTLELECO WINZARD MASHILE 				393RD RESPONDENT 
HANKI CHRISTOPHER MATEBULA 				394TH RESPONDENT 
MMABATHO MATLOU 						395TH RESPONDENT
ROBERT MAHATLANE 						396TH RESPONDENT
LIZZY TSHEPO MAYIU 						397TH RESPONDENT 
LUTHANDO ZOTHA MBATHA 					398TH RESPONDENT 
HLENGIWE MBATHA 						399TH RESPONDENT 
ANNA MAGUYO 							400TH RESPONDENT 
THOKOZWA MBENGWENE 					401ST RESPONDENT 
DUMISANI MKHWANAZI 						402ND RESPONDENT
MUSA SABELO MAMBA 						403RD RESPONDENT
MARIA SIBONGILE MANYIKA 					404TH RESPONDENT
SOPHIA MAKALELA 						405TH RESPONDENT
MERCEY MAKHOBA 						406TH RESPONDENT
JEFFREY HLAMULA MAKHUBELA 				407TH RESPONDENT
BUSISIWE MAOHONGELA 					408TH RESPONDENT
NONTOMBI MASANABO 						409TH RESPONDENT
MSAWENKOSI MASOND 					410TH RESPONDENT
RAKONTANE FRANS MASETLA 				411TH RESPONDENT
BETTY NOZINJA MATSHIGA 					412TH RESPONDENT
THEMBA MAVUNDLA 						413TH RESPONDENT
IDAH BUSISIWE MAZIBUKO 					414TH RESPONDENT
SIBUSISO MARKSMAN MAZIBUKO 				415TH RESPONDENT
NKOSANA MCOCO						416TH RESPONDENT 
XOLANI MDOKWE 							417TH RESPONDENT 
PATRICK MDLALOSE 						418TH RESPONDENT
NZUZO LUYANDA MDLULI 					419TH RESPONDENT
JULIA MFELANI 							420TH RESPONDENT
NOMFUNDO NOSIPHO MHLUNGU 				421ST RESPONDENT 
THANDEKA MKIZE 						422ND RESPONDENT 
DELISIWE MARTHA NKUTHA 					423RD RESPONDENT
DUDUZILE AGNES MLAMBO 					424TH RESPONDENT 
MMAMPEELE LUCIA 						425TH RESPONDENT 
SIPHO MNGUNI 							426TH RESPONDENT
MDUDUZI MNINZI 							427TH RESPONDENT
JOSEPHMOFOKENG 						428TH RESPONDENT
TSEBISO REPLY MOHLALA 					429TH RESPONDENT
YVONNE MOFOKENG 						430TH RESPONDENT 
KENNETH MOKUBUNG 						431ST RESPONDENT 
HABUNENI ALETTA MOLOI 					432ND RESPONDENT
NANDILE KARLINA MOPELI 					433RD RESPONDENT 
BRIAN MORAKE 							434TH RESPONDENT 
JAN MORAJANE 							435TH RESPONDENT
RAESETJA AGNES MOTHIBI 					436TH RESPONDENT
SIMPHIWE MPANGANE 						437TH RESPONDENT
MARITS MPHAOJWANE 						438TH RESPONDENT
NHLANHLA MTHIMUNYE 					439TH RESPONDENT
JOYCE MSIZA 							440TH RESPONDENT 
MOSES NDANGANENI MUTHELO 				441ST RESPONDENT
LAZOLA KHAYAKAZI TRACY MQUBE 			442ND RESPONDENT
LWAZI CEBELIHLE MHLUNGU 					443RD RESPONDENT
ELIZABETH NAMUNE 						444TH RESPONDENT
SIPHO GENIUS NGUBANE 					445TH RESPONDENT 
CABANGILE NDLOVU 						446TH RESPONDENT
SIYABONGA NGCOBO 						447TH RESPONDENT
NOSIPHO NGOBESE 						448TH RESPONDENT 
LAURETIA NGUBANE 						449TH RESPONDENT
JABULANI NKOSI 							450TH RESPONDENT 
MAKHOSINI NKOSI 						451ST RESPONDENT
JAFTA EPHRAIM NKOSI 						452ND RESPONDENT
TSHIDI FRANCIS NKOSI 						453RD RESPONDENT
NGUBANI NOKWANDA 						454TH RESPONDENT
STEPHINA NONG 							455TH RESPONDENT
NELISIWE SINDISIWE NOTYELWA 				456TH RESPONDENT
WILLY INNOCENT NTOMBELA 					457TH RESPONDENT
NTOMBIFUTHI NDLANGAMANDLA 				458TH RESPONDENT
SINOTHI MAXWELL NTULI 					459TH RESPONDENT
NTOMBUSUTHI HAPPINESS PETER 				460TH RESPONDENT
GODFFREY PHIRI 							461ST RESPONDENT
NONDUMISO WENDY PHUNGULA 				462ND RESPONDENT
LINDIWE RADEBE 						463RD RESPONDENT
NOSIPHIWO NWELE 						464TH RESPONDENT
SOLOMON MACWUELANE RADEBE 				465TH RESPONDENT
SYLEVESTER LEHLOHONOLO SEMOUSA 			466TH RESPONDENT
DOROMINAH SEROBE 						467TH RESPONDENT 
EMILY DIMAKATSO SETAI 					468TH RESPONDENT
JAMES SHABANGU 						469TH RESPONDENT 
THULI DORIS SHOBA 						470TH RESPONDENT
STHEMBISO SHOBA 						471ST RESPONDENT
SIPHIWE SIBIYA 							472ND RESPONDENT
TSHEPONG AMOS SIMANGO 					473RD RESPONDENT
SIBNGILE EUNICE SIMELANE 					474TH RESPONDENT
FRANCINA SEODISA 						475TH RESPONDENT
MIYA SIYELANE 							476TH RESPONDENT
NTLOKO SONWABO 						477TH RESPONDENT
PATRICIA TSHABALAL 						478TH RESPONDENT
BONGINKOSI TOKO 						479TH RESPONDENT
LERATO INNOCENTIA TSOTETSI 				480TH RESPONDENT
ESTHER THELMA VILAKAZI 					481ST RESPONDENT
DUDUZILE CYNTHIA ZUNGU 					482ND RESPONDENT
NKELI JAMES MAKUBUNG 					483RD RESPONNENT
AURELIA FIKILE 							484TH RESPONDENT

Date of Judgment: This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties’ legal representatives by email, release to the library of the court and uploaded on caselines. The date and time for handing down judgment is deemed to be 10:h00 9 June 2021.

Summary: Confirmation of the rule nisi – eviction of the respondents from the incomplete and complete houses of the local government. The respondents conceded to the unlawful occupation of the property but demanded alternative accommodation and negotiations with the Municipality before they could be evicted.
Held that in the circumstances of this matter the court could not countenance the self-help approach adopted by the respondents and thus ordered their eviction.

judgment

 Molahlehi J 
1.	Before this court are two applications that were consolidated in the rule nisi issued by Keightley J on 5 June 2020. The applicant is the City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, a Metropolitan Municipality (the Municipality) established in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, of 1998. The individual respondents are, the individuals who are unlawfully occupying the houses at portion 102, Farm Holgatatfontein 326 IR, NIGEL also known as "MACKENZIEVILLE EXTENSION 2." 

2.	It was indicated during oral submission that the Municipality was not persisting with paragraph 9 of the interim order made by Keightley J. This is the part of the order that declared any of the respondents who did not comply with the interim order to be in contempt of the order. Therefore, it follows that this matter turns mainly on whether the rule nisi relating to eviction should be confirmed. 

3.	The respondent opposed both applications and raised a point in limine concerning the non-joinder of the provincial and national government.

Background facts 

4.	It is common cause that the Municipality designed a housing development project with funding assistance from the provincial government. The project's objective is to meet the Municipality's constitutional duty under section 26 of the Constitution of providing residents falling within its jurisdiction housing at McKenzieville Extension 2. The project commenced in 2017 and was intended to provide housing for about 600 people. It is common cause that following applications by residents in the area the Municipality developed a list of individuals who qualified for housing subsidy. The contractors appointed by the applicant had, by December 2019, managed to develop infrastructure for 568 stands and completed 51 houses, ready for occupation. 

5.	After December 2019, there was no progress in the project due to the expiry of the contractors' contracts. The other reason for the lack of progress was the National State of Disaster declaration under the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 by the State President in terms of which movements of people and gathering were restricted. 

6.	It is common cause that the respondents moved onto the land and occupied both the completed and incomplete housing structures in Mackenzieville Extension 2. Following this, the applicant obtained an order from this court authorising the South African Police and the Metro Police to attend at the site and identify those who had occupied the properties illegally and served them with the notice in terms of section 4(2) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from Occupation of Land Act (PIE Act). 

7.	It is common cause that during March 2020, the respondents invaded the complete and incomplete houses in the project. Those who occupied the incomplete structures completed them and fitted the windows and doors. 

The respondent's defence

8.	The respondents did not dispute that their conduct is unlawful. They contended that the Municipality is not entitled to evict them even though the occupation of the property was unlawful. Their defence is that they moved into the area out of necessity, arising from the regulations governing COVID – 19 promulgated under the National State of Emergency Disaster Management Act 57 of 2020. The other reason for invading the properties is that they had been rendered homeless after being evicted as backyard dwellers from their previous rented premises. They further contended that the Municipality could not evict them unless alternative accommodation was made available, including engaging with them in discussions regarding the eviction.

The non-joinder point 

9.	The respondents contend that the applicant ought to have joined these proceedings both the national and provincial governments. The test for non-joinder is set out by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Absa Bank Limited v Naude N.O and Others (20264/2014) [2015] ZASCA 97; 2016 (6) SA 540 (SCA) (1 June 2015)in the following terms:
"[10] 	The test whether there has been non-joinder is whether a party has a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of the litigation, which may prejudice the party that has not been joined. In Gordon v Department of Health, KwaZulu-Natal it was held that if an order or judgment cannot be sustained without necessarily prejudicing the interest of third parties that had not been joined, then those third parties have a legal interest in the matter and must be joined." (Footnotes omitted).

10.	In Judicial Service Commission and Another v Cape Bar Council and Another, the court held that:
"[12] 	It has by now become settled law that the joinder of a party is only required as a matter of necessity – as opposed to a matter of convenience – if that party has a direct and substantial interest which may be affected prejudicially by the judgment of the court in the proceedings concerned (see eg Bowring NO v Vrededorp Properties CC 2007 (5) SA 391 (SCA) para 21). The mere fact that a party may have an interest in the outcome of the litigation does not warrant a non-joinder plea. The right of a party to validly raise the objection that other parties should have been joined to the proceedings, has thus been held to be a limited one."

11.	Applying the above test, in the present matter, I am of the view that the point raised by the respondents bears no merit. There are no facts supporting the contention that it was necessary to join the Provincial and National Government parties in these proceedings. Except that the Provincial Government provided funding for the project, there is nothing to show that it has a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of this matter.

 The eviction application 

12.	 I now turn to deal with the merits of the eviction application. I have already pointed out earlier that the Municipality has abandoned paragraph 9 of Keightley J's order. 

13.	In his oral argument, the respondents' Counsel emphasised that the Municipality was obliged to provide housing for the respondents in terms of section 26 of the Constitution. Section 26 of the Constitution provides:
"(1)	 Everyone has the right to have access to adequate housing.
(2) 	The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures within each available resources to achieve progressive realisation of this right.
(3)	 No one may be evicted from their home or have their home demolished without an order of the court, made after considering all relevant circumstances. No legislation may permit arbitrary eviction."

14.	The starting point in considering the relief sought by the applicant is whether there has been compliance with the provisions of section 4 of the PIE Act. Section 4(1), (2) and (3) of PIE Act provides:
“ (1) 	Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law or the common law, the provisions of this section apply to proceedings by an owner or person in charge of land for the eviction of an unlawful occupier. 
(2)	 At least 14 days before the hearing of the proceedings contemplated in subsection (1), the court must serve written and effective notice of the proceedings on the unlawful occupier and the municipality having jurisdiction.
(3)	 Subject to the provisions of subsection (2), the procedure for the serving of notices and filing of papers is as prescribed by the rules of the court in question. 

15.	It is trite that once there has been compliance with the provisions of section 4 (2) of the PIE Act, the owner of the property cannot be denied the eviction order unless the respondents in opposing the relief disclose circumstances that will entitle them to remain on the property. In other words, upon satisfaction of the procedural requirements in the absence of special circumstances, the owner is entitled to the eviction order. Ndlovu v Ngcobo Becker and another v Jika 4 All SA384 [SCA at paragraph 17 to 19

16.	It is trite that section 4 of PIE Act does not deprive the owner of the ownership of the property that is the subject of unlawful occupation. As stated in Ndlovu v Ngcobo the effect of the PIE Act is to delay or suspend the exercise of the ownership rights of the landowners until a determination has been made, whether it is just and equitable to evict the unlawful occupiers and under what conditions.

17.	As stated in Dwele v Phalatse and Others (11112/15) [2017] ZAGPJHC 146 (7 June 2017), section 4 of the PIE Act contains both procedural and substantive provisions. The procedural provisions are found in sections 4(2), (3), (4) and (5), and the substantive provisions are in sections 4(6), (7), (8) and (9) of the PIE Act. 

18.	In the present matter, there is no dispute about the procedural aspects of section 4 of PIE. The relief sought by the applicant, which the respondents oppose, has to do with the substantive provisions of section 4 of PIE. In this respect, sections 4(6), (7), (8) and (9) of PIE Act read as follows:
"(6)	 If an unlawful occupier has occupied the land in question for less than six months at the time when the proceedings are initiated, a court may grant an order for eviction if it is of the opinion that it is just and equitable to do so, after considering all the relevant circumstances, including the rights and needs of the elderly, children, disabled persons and households headed by women.
(7) 	If an unlawful occupier has occupied the land in question for more than six months at the time when the proceedings are initiated, a court may grant an order for eviction if it is of the opinion that it is just and equitable to do so, after considering all the relevant circumstances, including, except where the land sold in a sale of execution pursuant to a mortgage, where the land has been made available or can reasonably be made available by a municipality or other Organ of State or another landowner for the relocation of the unlawful occupier, and including the rights and needs of the elderly, children, disabled persons and households headed by women.
(8) 	If the court is satisfied that all the requirements of this section had been complied with and that no valid defence has been raised by the unlawful occupier, it must grant an order for the eviction of the unlawful occupier, and determine-
(a)	 a just and equitable date on which the unlawful occupier must vacate the land under the circumstances; and
(b) 	the date on which an eviction order may be carried out if the unlawful occupier has not vacated the land on the date contemplated in paragraph (a).
In determining a just and equitable date contemplated in sub-section (8), the court must have regard to all relevant factors, including the period the unlawful occupier and his or his family have resided on the land question."

19.	It is trite that in determining whether or not to grant an eviction order, the court has a discretion to be exercised, guided by what is just and equitable. See Ndlovu v. Ngcobo; Bekker and Another v. Jika 2004 (1) SA 114 (SCA) para 18. In determining whether there are just and equitable grounds to grant an eviction order, the court is obliged to have regard to all the relevant circumstances, including the availability of land for the relocation of the occupiers and the rights and needs of the elderly, children, disabled persons and households headed by women. The court is obliged to grant an eviction order if there is no valid defence and all the substantive requirement of section 4 of PIE are satisfied. 

20.	The inquiry following the above finding concerns the equitable date on which the unlawful occupier or occupiers must vacate the property. The date chosen for the eviction of the illegal occupiers has to be just and fair to all parties. 

21.	The relevant facts and circumstances in this matter that have to be taken into account in considering the relief sought by the applicant the following. As stated earlier, it is common cause that the respondents unlawfully occupied the completed and incomplete structures in the area. It is also common cause that, except for a few, most of them are not on the list of beneficiaries. However, those whose names appear on the beneficiaries’ list also did not act lawfully in occupying the houses before being properly allocated by the Municipality. It is apparent that the structures were not yet certified ready for occupation, neither were any of them provided with the certificate of occupancy. It, therefore, cannot be said that they are lawful occupiers. 

22.	When invading the, arear the respondents were fully aware that they were not on the list of beneficiaries. Their papers reveal that they were aware that other people in the area had successfully applied for the subsidy and were already on the waiting list. 

23.	In my view, the respondents' conduct should not be countenance by this court because otherwise, the rule of law would be compromised. In Lesapo v North West Agricultural Bank and Another (CCT23/99) [1999] ZACC 16; 2000 (1) SA 409; 1999 (12) BCLR 1420 (16 November 1999) the Constitutional Court per Mokgoro J said: 
"No one is entitled to take the law into her or his own hands. Self-help, in this sense, is inimical to a society in which the rule of law prevails, as envisioned by section 1(c) of our Constitution, which provides:
'The Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state founded on the following values:
. . . .
(c) 	Supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law."
Taking the law into one's own hands is thus inconsistent with the fundamental principles of our law."

24.	In addition to the defence of necessity, the respondents suggested that they were entitled to unlawfully occupy the properties because some of the Municipality officials were involved in fraudulent conduct about the development of the housing beneficiary list. They allege that one of the officials in the housing department was dismissed for being involved in fraud. This has not been substantiated in that there is no supporting documentary proof or supporting affidavit that the person was dismissed for fraud related to the list of housing beneficiaries. But more importantly, there is no averment that the alleged fraudulent list was ever reported to the police. There is also no indication as to why legal steps could not have been taken to interdict the implementation of the list before resorting to self-help. 

25.	In the circumstances of this case, refusing to grant an eviction order would result in what the Constitutional Court in, President of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd (Agri SA and Others, Amici Curiae) 2005 (5) SA 3 CC at para 45) referred to as a recipe for anarchy. It would also create a precedent for people to jump the queue and qualify themselves through the back door onto the housing lists in the municipalities. The other risk associated with refusing to grant an eviction in the circumstances of this matter is that the use of self-help would result in people losing confidence in the rule of law, which will invariably lead to unwanted public violence. This applies to the respondents' argument that they should only be evicted on condition the Municipality provides them with alternative accommodation.

26.	As indicated earlier, the respondents' Counsel argued that the respondents had the right to housing in terms of section 26 of the Constitution, and I suppose that is why they should not be evicted until alternative land is found for them. However, the right is limited "within available resources to achieve the progressive realisation of this right." 

27.	The circumstances in the present matter is distinguishable to those in Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Another v Various Occupiers, Eden Park Extension 5 2014 (3) SA 23 (SCA) wherein the Supreme Court of Appeal found that the Municipality had "displayed uncertainty as to the identification of those persons who were to be evicted and the integrity of the waiting list and the allocation process had been compromised." In the present matter, the Municipality engaged the services of the police to identify the people who had illegally moved .in the area, and there is no issue about the integrity of the process embarked upon in evicting all the illegal occupiers of the structures. It also important to note that at the time the Municipality instituted the eviction proceedings the respondents had taken possession of the properties for less than six months. 

28.	In light of the above, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case that it is just and equitable to evict the respondents from Mackenzi Extension 2. In other words, the Municipality made out a case for the confirmation of the rule nisi. In light of this and as already alluded to earlier, there is no need to deal with the issue of the interdict. 

29.	The issue that remains for determination is the date of the eviction. As alluded to earlier the respondents unlawfully took occupation of the properties that belonged to the Municipality. At the time of taking occupation of the properties they were aware that it was unlawful for them to do so. In this context it is just and fair to afford them a period of thirty days to vacate the properties in question. 

30.	In relation to costs of the applications, the Municipality’s Counsel conceded that in the circumstances of this case it would not be appropriate to allow the costs to follow the results. 

Order 

31.	In the premises, the following order is made: 
1.	An order for the eviction of the First, Fourth to Four Hundred and Eighty Fourth Respondents and all those occupying the properties through and under them at the properties described as portion 102, of the farm Holgatfontein 326 IR, Nigel also known as Mackenzieville Extension 2 is granted. 
2.	The First and Fourth to Four Hundred and Eighty Fourth Respondents and all those claiming occupation through and under them are ordered to vacate the property by 7 July 2021.
3.	In the event where the First, Fourth to Four Hundred and Eighty Fourth Respondents and all those claiming occupation through and under them failing to comply with the order set out above, then and in that event, the City of Ekurhuleni Police Services and or the South African Police Services and or assisted by the Sheriff of this Court or his lawful deputy and a Locksmith are ordered and directed to carry out the eviction order on or after 14 July 2021. 
4.	In the event where the First and Fourth to Four Hundred and Eighty Fourth Respondents and all those that occupy the property by virtue of, through or under them attempt to regain access or possession to the property after the eviction order has been executed by the Sheriff and/or his/her authorised deputy; the applicant does not need to approach this court for relief and the City of Ekurhuleni Police Services and or the South African Police Services and or assisted by the Sheriff of this Court or his lawful deputy and a Locksmith Sheriff and/or his/her authorised deputy are authorised and directed to take all legal steps to enforce this Court order once again, including enlisting the services of the South African Police Services and a Locksmith.
5.	 There is no order as to costs.

___________________
E MOLAHLEHI J
Judge of the Gauteng High Court.

APPEARANCES
For the applicant: Adv. E Sithole 
Instructed by: Lebea Incoporated Attorneys
For the Respondent: Adv. D Brown
Instructed by. Chris Billing Attorneys
Heard: 31 May 2021
Delivered: 9 June 2021