The eviction of 90 students from New Market Junction in Woodstock was lawful and did not contravene the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (PIE).
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) held that the student residence at a higher education institution “is not considered a home” and as such PIE was not applicable, and Stay At South Point Properties, the applicant, was entitled to secure their eviction.
By the time the litigation process reached the SCA, the students had already vacated the premises but the matter proceeded because of the wider and far-reaching implications of the eviction of students from student accommodation.
Judge Nelisa Mali said it was important to deal with the matter, “because the rights and duties of students provided with accommodation by CPUT is an issue of recurring controversy”.
Judge Mali’s judgment read: “The students enrolled at CPUT during the 2020 academic year were allocated accommodation by CPUT in the residence until the end of November 2020.
“However, they remained in occupation of the residence and refused to vacate, after CPUT gave them notice to do so within 72 hours of their last examination of the 2020 academic year, in terms of its procedures.”
“The seventy-ninth to ninetieth respondents were granted permission to remain in the residence for the 2021 academic year, but they were required to vacate the premises at the end of 2020 and stay in alternative premises, which the appellant had made available, so that maintenance and decontamination could be done. These respondents also refused to vacate the residence. Consequently, the appellant summoned private security guards to remove them forcibly on 12 January 2021.
”When the respondents resisted their forcible removal, the appellant approached the high court on 15 January 2021 for an order to evict the respondents from the residence.
The appellant relied upon the revindicatio (to recover possession of property) to do so...The appellant contended that the residence did not constitute the respondents’ home, and if evicted, they would not be rendered homeless, because they had homes to go to,” the judgment read.
CPUT declined to comment on the judgment and attempts to contact the students were unsuccessful.
Elijah Moholola, spokesperson, for the University of Cape Town which had entered as an amicus curiae (friend of the court) in the matter, said: “UCT notes the judgement by the SCA in the matter referred to. As an amicus curiae, UCT was not a party to the case, but rather had interest in the matter.”
Cape Times