An Eviction, but may Different Considerations Apply in Future Cases? A Comment on Pieterse v Drumearn (Pty) Ltd

Abstract

The Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA) regulates the eviction of vulnerable occupiers from land in a fair manner. It also recognises the right of owners to apply to court for an eviction order in appropriate circumstances. However, ESTA does not set out procedural or substantive requirements when relocations are at stake. Instead, the practices and approaches have been developed by way of case law. Recently, the Land Claims Court (LCC) in Pieterse v Drumearn (Pty) Ltd had to decide whether a relocation of a long-term occupier from one house to another, which is situated on land belonging to two different entities, but with distinct cadastral descriptions, constituted an eviction under ESTA. The LCC found that a relocation from one land to the other was an eviction. Although the case note accepts that an eviction or a relocation would technically depend on the cadastral description of the property involved, it is argued that it should not be the only determining factor. The court should also consider who the registered owner of the land is to allow a relocation where two registered parcels of land belong to the same person or entity.