Previous 51 / 51 Next

For the Applicant: Advocate JJ Gauntlett SC and Advocate FB Pelser instructed by Moodie & Robertson. For the First Respondent: Advocate MSM Brassey SC and Advocate GA Fourie instructed by Schindlers Attorneys. For the Second Respondent: Advocate P Kennedy SC, Advocate H Barnes and Advocate S Wilson instructed by Wits Law Clinic. For the Amicus Curiae: Advocate AA Gabriel SC and Advocate BSM Bedderson instructed by Lawyers for Human Rights.

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v. Blue Moonlight Properties 39 (PTY) Ltd. and Occupiers of Saratoga Avenue

Judgments

Preview

Country

South Africa

Rights Involved

Right to adequate housing

Issue

Progressive realization

National Court

Constitutional Court of South Africa

Date: Dec 1, 2011

Summary: In a unanimous judgment written by Van der Westhuizen J the Court held that Blue Moonlight could evict unlawful occupiers from its property if this was just and equitable. In this case, the Court held that it would only be just and equitable to evict the occupiers, if the City provided them with temporary accommodation upon their eviction. The Court further found that the City was under an obligation to provide the occupiers with such temporary accommodation and that the City's current housing policy which differentiated between those evicted by private entities and relocated by the City was unconstitutional.

Primary Documents

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v. Blue Moonlight Properties 39 (Pty) Ltd and Another.pdf
English
Download View

Resourcing Rights

Select target paragraph3

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v. Blue Moonlight Properties 39 (PTY) Ltd. and Occupiers of Saratoga Avenue

Primary Documents

Notifications