A re-occurring example of this deprivation we are regularly faced with is, where a lease agreement has been cancelled and as a result of this, continued occupation of the property would be illegal. The owner of the property might feel entitled to regain possession of the property by utilising a wide range of, sometimes very creative means, other than obtaining a court order. The means referred to can take on various forms; it can be disconnecting of electricity supply to the property, removing some of the doors, changing the locks to the property, etc. One of the most dangerous of these would be to allow another person or persons to take occupation of the property together with the illegal occupants. The property owner might be under the impression that she is acting lawfully. This impression of acting legally is often supported by other frustrated landowners on online forums and so forth. It is indeed the case that an owner has a very strong right to the property, but forcefully regaining the right of occupation of the property may only be done when this is ordered by a court. According to section 26 of the Constitution, no person may be evicted without a court ordering to do so. In order for any society to function properly, it is crucial for citizens not to take the law into their own hands.
A person may only be deprived of possession by a court order. This is to ensure that all the circumstances of the case are brought before a competent court in order to make an order that would be just and equitable. If a person has been deprived of possession (spoliated), he can approach a court with a spoliation application. These applications can very often be heard on an urgent basis. Should the court be satisfied that the person has been in possession of property and has been deprived of that possession without a court order, the court will grant an order to place the person back in possession of the property. The order will usually include a cost order. If done in the High Court on an urgent basis the person who deprived the other of possession can easily be ordered to pay legal costs to the possessor in the excess of R25 000.00, this after placing the person back in possession of the property.
The effect would be that the illegal occupant would be given back the premises, the owner would be liable for legal costs and even worse, leaving the illegal occupant with a sense of entitlement to the premises. This typically leads to extended, opposed and accordingly costly evictions. The most effective, and cost effective way to have an illegal occupant removed from a premises is without a doubt a legal eviction done by specialist attorneys. Therefore, act legally and within the ambit of the law. Taking the law into your own hands is not the right route to follow and could be the difference between a successful eviction and a horrid property law experience. As always #happyrenting.
The effect of a sale on a management mandate agreement Is the purchaser of a property with a tenant in the premises duty-bound to perform in terms of the former landlord’s obligations towards the lease agreement, or in terms of a mandate in the case of a management mandate agreement? The lease agreement remains in […]
Obtaining court dates from the High Courts in Lockdown Level 1 As much as we, as legal practitioners, have got used to attending to court virtually and working with the new online court system, called CaseLines; the legal profession is still experiencing extreme difficulties. The latest court directives allow us to issue new proceedings at […]
Does Section 4(5)(c) of the Rental Housing Act contradict the principle of huur gaat voor koop? The legal principle of huur gaat voor koop was established within Roman Dutch Law and has, since the adoption of Roman Dutch Law as the foundation of the South African legal system, been one of the cornerstone principles governing property […]
Why were these regulations declared unconstitutional by the High Court? What does this mean? On 2 June 2020 the High Court handed down a judgement in the matter of De Beer v COTGA. News of this judgement spread in the media and on social media like wildfire, with headings like “Lockdown Regulations Unconstitutional”; as much […]
LEVEL 4 REGULATIONS ON EVICTIONS The Alert Level 4 Regulations were released to the public explaining exactly what Level 4 will entail for the South African public. One of the regulations, specifically Regulation 19, deals with the prohibition of evictions and has a big effect on our property industry. The Regulation reads as follows: A […]
No regulations of any kind have been implemented to authorise tenants to refrain from paying rent. The global pandemic brought about by the COVID-19 virus has thrust South Africa into one of the most unfamiliar and uncertain times in our history, the likes of which never before experienced. Government has, in response to the virus, […]