VAN DER WESTHUIZEN J [38] This Court has also recognised the concept of ubuntu as underlying the Constitution and PIE and that it is relevant to their interpretation. In PE Municipality it was stated: ―Thus, PIE expressly requires the court to infuse elements of grace and compassion into the formal structures of the law. It is called upon to balance competing interests in a principled way and to promote the constitutional vision of a caring society based on good neighbourliness and shared concern. The Constitution and PIE confirm that we are not islands unto ourselves. The spirit of ubuntu, part of the deep cultural heritage of the majority of the population, suffuses the whole constitutional order. It combines individual rights with a communitarian philosophy. It is a unifying motif of the Bill of Rights, which is nothing if not a structured, institutionalised and operational declaration in our evolving new society of the need for human interdependence, respect and concern.‖39 (Footnote omitted.) [39] A court must consider an open list of factors in the determination of what is just and equitable.40 The relevant factors to be taken into account in this case are the following. The Occupiers have been in occupation for more than six months. Some of them have occupied the property for a long time. The occupation was once lawful. Blue Moonlight was aware of the Occupiers when it bought the property. Eviction of the Occupiers will render them homeless. There is no competing risk of homelessness on the part of Blue Moonlight, as there might be in circumstances where eviction is sought to enable a family to move into a home. nor was the applicant deprived thereof permanently (at para 36). For an analytical framework for section 25, see FNB above n 31. 39 PE Municipality above n 12 at para 37. 40 See subsections 4(6) and 4(7) of PIE above n 26. 19