<p>This research paper aimed to explore the relevant circumstances that the legislature has specified must be considered before an eviction application is granted and the meaning that the courts have given these circumstances in both Section 26(3) of the South African Constitution and enabling legislation. It also explored whether a transformative interpretation has been given to the meaning of &quot / all relevant circumstances&quot / within the legislation, its proposed amendments, and by the courts.</p>

<p>This research paper aimed to explore the relevant circumstances that the legislature has specified must be considered before an eviction application is granted and the meaning that the courts have given these circumstances in both Section 26(3) of the South African Constitution and enabling legislation. It also explored whether a transformative interpretation has been given to the meaning of &quot / all relevant circumstances&quot / within the legislation, its proposed amendments, and by the courts.</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / This research paper aimed to explore the relevant circumstances that the legislature has specified must be considered before an eviction application is granted and the meaning that the courts have given these circumstances in both Section 26(3) of the South African Constitution and enabling legislation. It also explored whether a transformative interpretation has been given to the meaning of &quot;all relevant circumstances&quot; within the legislation, its proposed amendments, and by the courts. / South Africa

Thesis (LLM (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT:The objective of this thesis is to establish whether the notion of public nuisance has a legitimate purpose in post-apartheid South African. Public nuisance originated in English law in the 12th century as a tort-based crime called tort against land and was used to protect the Crown against infringements. This special remedy of the Crown was used in cases of unlawful obstruction of public highways and rivers, damage or injury causing an inconvenience to a class or all of her majesty‟s subjects and a selection of other crimes. The notion of public nuisance was adopted in South African law during the late 19th century. Between its inception and 1943, the notion of public nuisance was applied in line with its original aims, namely to protect and preserve the health, safety and morals of the public at large. Public nuisance regulated unreasonable interferences such as smoke, noise, violence, litter and blockage of roads which originated in a public space or land, as opposed to a private space or land. However, the public nuisance remedy was indirectly used, in a number of cases during the 1990s, by private individuals to apply for an interdict to evict occupiers of informal settlements. In so doing, these private individuals bypassed legislation regulating evictions and in the process disrupted or frustrated new housing developments, especially those provided for in land reform programmes. In fact, it was established that this indirect application of public nuisance is unconstitutional in terms of section 25(1) of the Constitution. Most of the public disturbances originally associated with the public nuisance doctrine are currently provided for in legislation. Since the remedy is now mainly provided for in legislation, the question is whether the doctrine of public nuisance as a Common Law remedy is still relevant in modern South African law. It was concluded, especially after an analysis of two cases during 2009 and 2010, that the notion of public nuisance only has a future in South African law if it is applied iv in the absence of statutory nuisance or any other legislation covering public nuisance offences and where it is not used as an alternative mechanism to evict occupiers. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van die tesis is om vas te stel of publieke oorlas as gemeenregtelike remedie „n geldige doel in post-apartheid Suid-Afrika het. Die remedie bekend as publieke oorlas het ontstaan in 12de eeuse Engelse reg. Hierdie remedie het ontwikkel as „n delikteregtelike en kriminele remedie, met die doel om land wat aan die Kroon behoort te beskerm. Publieke oorlas het, onder andere, toepassing gevind waar daar onwettige obstruksie van publieke hoofweë en riviere was sowel as skade of nadeel wat vir die breë publiek ongerief sou veroorsaak. Ander misdade was ook gekenmerk as „n publieke oorlas. Publieke oorlas is teen die laat 19de eeu in die Suid-Afrikaanse regoorgeneem . Tussen die oorname van die remedie in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg en 1943 is die remedie van publieke oorlas toegepas in lyn met sy oorspronlike doelwitte, naamlik om optrede wat die gesondheid, veiligheid en moraliteit van die breë publiek in gedrang kon bring, te verhoed. Volgens sy oorspronklike doel reguleer publieke oorlas onredelike inmenging soos rook, geraas, geweld en obstruksie van paaie wat op publieke grond of „n publieke spasie ontstaan het. Die remedie van publieke oorlas is, in ‟n reeks sake gedurende die 1990‟s, deur privaat individue indirek gebruik om okkupeerders van informele nedersettings uit te sit. Sodoende het privaat individue die wetgewing wat spesiaal ontwerp is om uitsettings te reguleer vermy en in die proses nuwe behuisingsontwikkelinge ontwrig en gefrustreer, veral in gevalle waarvoor in grondhervormingsprogramme voorsiening gemaak word. Hierdie indirekte toepasing van publieke oorlas is ongrondwetlik omdat dit nie met artikel 25(1) van die Grondwet versoenbaar is nie. Die meerderheid van steurnisse wat gewoonlik met publieke oorlas geassosieer word, word tans deur wetgewing gereguleer. Aangesien die remedie nou hoofsaaklik in wetgewing vervat is, ontstaan die vraag of die leerstuk van publieke oorlas as „n gemeenregtelike remedie nog van enige nut is in die moderne Suid-Afrikaanse reg. vi Die slotsom, veral na die analise van twee sake in 2009 en 2010, was dat die publieke oorlas remedie slegs „n toekoms in Suid-Afrikaanse reg het, indien dit toegepas word in die afwesigheid van statutêre oorlas of enige ander wetgewing wat publieke oorlas oortredinge dek en waar dit nie as „n alternatiewe meganisme gebruik word om okkupeerders uit te sit nie. / National Research Fund

The period preceding and after the enactment of ESTA marks an increase in the difficulties faced by the farm dwellers in South Africa. They are still faced with illegal evictions. Their difficulties are marked with loss of land for food farming, loss of work, income and homes. Nevertheless, the introduction of ESTA in 1997 aimed at protecting and restoring the land rights of farm dwellers working on farms. Despite its existence there are still challenges of illegal evictions. This research focuses on difficulties faced by farm workers after the enactment of ESTA and investigate the process and effects of illegal evictions. The thesis adopts a qualitative research methodology that takes the form of a case study on two farms, Killarney farm and Shellford farm, where farm workers experienced evictions. The findings confirm that the farm workers are subject to illegal evictions. The evictions are due to the conversion of agricultural farms to game farming and also due to labour disputes. Poor living conditions are evident and farm owners conduct tacit evictions by imposing restrictions and threatening the farm workers who wish to stay on the farms. This thesis concludes by presenting suggestions that may restrict or put an end to illegal evictions. ESTA needs to be amended in order to ensure the security of farm workers who live on the farms.

The study investigates management of official accommodation in the Department of Roads and Public Works. Government immovable asset plays an essential role in ser-vice delivery. The official accommodation policies were not implemented as intendant and as a result, the former government employees are illegal occupants in government properties. The implementation of legislation and departmental policy for official ac-commodation are problematic when illegal occupants occupied government immova-ble assets without lease agreement. The present of illegal occupants has a negative impact to officials who qualify to occupy government properties in terms of the depart-mental policy for service delivery purposes. The study proposed to provide literature search using books, legislation, policies, and personal interviews among others. The research methodology employed in this study was described, followed by the legislative framework employed in this study. Some of the findings on a legislative framework for official accommodation in the department of Roads and Public Works in the department of Roads and Public Works include gaps at the implementation of departmental policy on Allocation of Official Housing in rela-tion to the lease of state owned properties. Recommendations as a result of descriptive literature search are presented and how the existing problem of implementation of official accommodation policies can be changed to enhance service delivery and to provide accommodation to officials who qualify to occupy government immovable assets. The recommendations will enable the Department of Roads and Public Works as custodian of immovable assets, to fulfil its Constitutional mandate to provide official accommodation to their officials and cli-ents departments who qualify in terms of the policy for service delivery purposes.

Thesis (MDev.) -- University of Limpopo, 2016 / The purpose of this study was to assess the socio-economic effects of farm evictions in Mogale City Local Municipality, Gauteng Province. Most of the land owners do not adhere to the legislations which govern evictions in general and to the Extension of Security of Tenure Act which governs farm eviction on specific. The key objectives of the study were to identify the socio-economic effects of farm evictions and to analyse how the affected communities responded to the phenomenon of evictions. The key questions were what are the socio-economic effects do eviction have on farm dwellers and how have the affected communities responded to the phenomenon of eviction. The literature revealed that evictions around the world started decades ago and to date are still happening. In Zimbabwe, evictions were initiated by white farmers as a way of redressing the imbalance of the land ownership; in China evictions are mainly caused by rapid population growth and expansion of cities, in Namibia, Germans expropriated land and forcefully removed original owners of such land. Since independence, Namibia has no legislation governing evictions and this pose a thread of tenure insecurity. Although South Africa has legislations which govern the evictions, evictions are still taking place and mostly initiated by white land owners. The quantitative survey study was conducted to determine the distribution of socio-economic variables before and after the eviction. The primary data was collected, using semi-structured questionnaires which the interviewer administered to the evicted households. The findings revealed that electricity supply, garbage collection, personal care, household income, access to health facilities are negatively affected and the condition of the households deteriorated after the eviction. The main recommendation on the basis of the findings is that the MCLM, DRDLR and NDHS should adhere to the principles outlined in the article 25(1) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948. This would reduce the negative impact of evictions.

Thesis (LLD )--Stellenbosch University, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This dissertation considers the housing rights of unlawful occupiers in the post-1994 constitutional dispensation. Section 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 affords everyone a right of access to adequate housing. This provision is a decisive break with the apartheid past, where forced eviction banished black people to the periphery of society. The central hypothesis of this dissertation is that the Constitution envisages the creation of a society that is committed to large-scale transformation. This dissertation posits that it is impossible to realise the full transformative potential of section 26 of the Constitution in the absence of an independent and substantive understanding of what it means to have access to adequate housing. This dissertation traverses legal theory as well as the common law of evictions, constitutional law and international law. A consciously interdisciplinary approach is adopted in seeking to develop the content of section 26 of the Constitution, drawing on literature from social and political science. This dissertation develops an organising framework for giving substantive content to section 26(1) of the Constitution with reference to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; the Revised European Social Charter, the American Convention on Human Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This dissertation shows that the adjudication of eviction disputes has moved away from a position under the common law where Courts had no discretion to refuse eviction orders based on the personal circumstances of the squatters. The adjudication of the eviction of unlawful occupiers now requires a context-sensitive analysis that seeks to find concrete and case-specific solutions. These solutions are achieved by considering what would be just and equitable for both the land owner and the unlawful occupiers. This dissertation also shows that the government has a markedly different role to fulfil in post-apartheid evictions through the necessary joinder of local authorities to eviction proceedings, meaningful engagement with unlawful occupiers and the provision of alternative accommodation in terms of its constitutional and statutory obligations. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie proefskrif ondersoek die behuisingsregte van onregmatige okkupeerders in die post-1994 grondwetlike bedeling. Artikel 26 van die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika, 1996 gee elke persoon die reg op toegang tot geskikte behuising. Hierdie bepaling is ‘n duidelike breuk met die apartheid-verlede waar gedwonge uitsettings swart mense na die periferie van die samelewing verban het. Die sentrale hipotese van hierdie proefskrif is dat die Grondwet beoog om ‘n samelewing te skep wat verbind is tot grootskaalse transformasie. Hierdie proefskrif voer aan dat dit onmoontlik is om die volle transformerende potensiaal van artikel 26 van die Grondwet te verwesenlik in die afwesigheid van ‘n onafhanklike en substantiewe begrip van wat dit beteken om toegang tot geskikte behuising te hê. Hierdie proefskrif deurkruis regsteorie sowel as die gemenereg ten aansien van uitsettings, staatsreg and internasionale reg. ‘n Doelbewuste interdisiplinêre benadering word gevolg in die soeke na die ontwikkeling van die inhoud van artikel 26 van die Grondwet met verwysing na literatuur uit die sosiale- en politieke wetenskappe. Die proefskrif ontwikkel ‘n organiserende raamwerk waarmee substantiewe inhoud aan artikel 26(1) van die Grondwet verleen kan word met verwysing na die Internasionale Verdrag op Ekonomiese, Sosiale en Kulturele Regte; die Konvensie vir die Beskerming van Menseregte en Fundamentele Vryhede; die Hersiene Europese Sosiale Handves; die Amerikaanse Konvensie op Menseregte en die Afrika Handves op Mense en Persoonsregte. Hierdie proefskrif wys dat die beregting van uitsettingsdispute wegbeweeg het van ’n posisie onder die gemenereg waar howe geen diskresie gehad het om uitsettingsbevele te weier op grond van die persoonlike omstandighede van die plakkers nie. Die beregting van uitsettingsdispute vereis nou ‘n konteks-sensitiewe analise wat strewe daarna om konkrete oplossings te vind. Hierdie oplossings word bereik deur in ag te neem wat reg en billik sal wees vir beide die eienaar en die onregmatige okkupeerders. Die proefskrif wys ook dat die regering ‘n merkbaar nuwe rol vervul in post-apartheid uitsettings deur die noodsaaklike voeging van munisipaliteite tot uitsettings, sinvolle interaksie met onregmatige okkupeerders en die voorsiening van alternatiewe akkommodasie in terme van grondwetlike and statutêre pligte.

Thesis (LLD (Private Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: South African courts seem to be adopting a new approach to the problem of building encroachments. For pragmatic and policy reasons courts are now inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of leaving building encroachments in place, against compensation, despite the common law right to demand removal. It has been widely accepted that courts indeed have the discretion to award damages instead of removal of the building encroachment. However, the circumstances involved and the consequences of these orders are uncertain and hence these orders result in confusion. It is unclear how this discretion is exercised. Furthermore, it is uncertain whether this discretion includes the power to order transfer of the encroached-upon land to the encroacher. There are doctrinal and constitutional implications that may be triggered by these court orders that leave building encroachments in place. The doctrinal issues centre on what happens when an encroachment is not removed and nothing is said about the rights of the respective parties after the order is made. Possible solutions are investigated to provide a doctrinally sound outcome in encroachment disputes. It is clear that the encroacher is allowed to continue occupying the portion of property on which the encroachment is erected. It seems as though a use right is indirectly created when the encroachment remains in place. The constitutional difficulty lies in the fact that the court orders may result in infringements that conflict with section 25 of the Constitution. The focus is specifically to determine whether these orders result in the compulsory loss of property or property rights. With reference to Germany, the Netherlands and Australia, a comparative perspective is provided in order to support the doctrinal and policy arguments. The comparative law provides a source of guidelines for what may work effectively and informs the ultimate suggestion of this project, namely the need for legislation to regulate building encroachments in South Africa. The legislation envisaged would have to prescribe with at least some sort of certainty how and in which circumstances the discretion should be exercised. It should also provide clarity with regard to the right that is created when the encroachment is not removed and how the compensation that is awarded in exchange for removal, should be determined. The unnecessary confusion and uncertainty that result from court orders made in the context of building encroachments may be cleared up by legislation. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Suid Afrikaanse howe begin al hoe meer om ‘n nuwe benadering te volg ten opsigte van oorskrydende bouwerke. Dit lyk asof howe meer geneig is om hul diskresie uit te oefen ten gunste daarvan om die oorskryding vir pragmatiese en beleidsredes teen vergoeding in stand te hou, ten spyte van die gemeenregtelike reg om verwydering te eis. Daar word algemeen aanvaar dat howe wel die diskresie het om in die konteks van oorskrydende bouwerke skadevergoeding toe te ken in plaas van verwydering. Die omstandighede betrokke by en die nagevolge van hierdie beslissings is egter onseker en daarom lei dit tot verwarring. Dit is nie altyd duidelik hoe hierdie diskresie uitgeoefen word nie. Daarbenewens is daar ook onsekerheid oor of die diskresie die bevoegdheid insluit om oordrag van die grond waarop die oorsrkryding staan, te gelas. Die beslissings kan ook doktrinêre en grondwetlike implikasies hê. In terme van die doktrinêre probleem is daar vrae oor wat gebeur as die oorskryding nie verwyder word nie en niks word gesê oor die regte van beide partye in die dispuut nie. Oplossings word ondersoek om die beste moontlike doktrinêre verduideliking te probeer vasstel. Die eienaar van die oorskrydende bouwerk mag voortgaan om die grond waarop die oorskryding staan te okkupeer. Dit lyk asof ‘n gebruiksreg indirek geskep word ten gunste van die oorskryder wanneer die oorskryding nie verwyder word nie. ‘n Grondwetlike probleem mag veroorsaak word deur die moontlike oortreding van artikel 25 van die Grondwet. Die beslissings mag lei tot die gedwonge verlies van grond of regte, wat aan die vereistes van artikel 25 moet voldoen. ‘n Vergelykende perspektief met verwysing na Duitsland, Nederland en Australië word verskaf om die doktrinêre en beleidsargumente te ondersteun. Die vergelykende reg bied ‘n bron van riglyne vir wat effektief kan werk en het dus die wetgewing wat in hierdie proefskrif voorgestel word geïnspireer. Die wetgewing wat beoog word sal moet voorskryf hoe en onder watter omstanghede die diskresie uitgeoefen moet word. Dit moet ook sekerheid gee ten opsigte van die reg wat geskep word as die oorskryding nie verwyder word nie en hoe die skadevergoeding bepaal moet word. Die onnodige verwaring en onsekerheid wat veroorsaak word deur hierdie hofbeslissings kan opgeklaar word deur die promulgering van wetgewing om oorskrydende bouwerke te reguleer.