Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Correct Question 2 of LSK 02 01

    Uploaded by

    Vincentius Krige
    The case involved an eviction application against residents of an informal settlement. The legal question was what criteria courts should use to determine whether to issue an eviction order. The court emphasized that the rights to housing and property should be weighed equally, and public interest, alternative accommodations, and vulnerability of individuals should be considered when deciding on evictions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Correct Question 2 of LSK 02 01

    Uploaded by

    Vincentius Krige
    11 views2 pages
    The case involved an eviction application against residents of an informal settlement. The legal question was what criteria courts should use to determine whether to issue an eviction order. The court emphasized that the rights to housing and property should be weighed equally, and public interest, alternative accommodations, and vulnerability of individuals should be considered when deciding on evictions.

    Original Title

    CORRECT QUESTION 2 OF LSK 02 01

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The case involved an eviction application against residents of an informal settlement. The legal question was what criteria courts should use to determine whether to issue an eviction order. The court emphasized that the rights to housing and property should be weighed equally, and public interest, alternative accommodations, and vulnerability of individuals should be considered when deciding on evictions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    11 views2 pages

    Correct Question 2 of LSK 02 01

    Uploaded by

    Vincentius Krige
    The case involved an eviction application against residents of an informal settlement. The legal question was what criteria courts should use to determine whether to issue an eviction order. The court emphasized that the rights to housing and property should be weighed equally, and public interest, alternative accommodations, and vulnerability of individuals should be considered when deciding on evictions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Question 2

    “In the case of City of Johannesburg v Changing Tides 74(Pty)Ltd and others (2012)
    6 SA 294(SCA)”,

    FACTS

    “The facts involved an eviction application by the City of Johannesburg against


    residents of an informal settlement”.i The city claimed that the occupants should be
    evicted as they were using the land illegally.

    Legal Question:
    “The legal question centered how courts should approach eviction applications and
    what factors it should be considered”. The court must decide what criteria should be
    used when determining whether to issue an eviction order.

    Ratio Decidendi:
    “The ratio decidendi emphasizes that, in light of the fact that property is not absolute,
    courts should weigh the rights to housing and property equally. The public interest,
    alternative accommodations, and the vulnerability of the affected individuals should
    all be considered by the courts. The ruling emphasized that accommodations must
    be provided by both public and private organizations, especially when they impact
    communities or vulnerable individuals”.ii
    The court has already decided that the grant of eviction order against the occupiers
    is just and equitable and, most importantly, the occupiers do not appeal against that
    decision.

    In this particular case, the court determined that the occupiers had to establish a
    community on the land since they had been there for an extended period of time.
    The occupiers' entitlement to housing had been recognized by the court, which also
    acknowledged that their removal would leave them without a place to live.The
    landowner's lack of development or use of the land was another factor taken into
    consideration by the court.

    Conclusion:

    “The case demonstrated that eviction proceedings require a comprehensive


    approach that considers the various rights at play as well as the larger societal
    context.” The state and private landowners have an obligation to provide homes and
    accommodation; their claim to property is not absolute.

    i
    ChatGtp question 2(0).pdf
    ii
    ChatGtp question 2 (2).pdf

    You might also like