Synopsis:
Demolition of shacks — invasion of government land — locus
standi — leave to intervene in proceedings where no interim
demolition and eviction order granted — allegations of the party
whose locus standi is challenged to be taken as true for
determination of locus standi — appellants have locus standi to
intervene in proceedings brought by MEC for demolition of their
structures — demolition of someone’s structure — act of eviction
itself — constitutionality of interim eviction order granted
without compliance with Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and
Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 — not necessary
for Court to decide constitutionality of such interim order when
not on appeal and when there is another interim order protecting
the appellants’ rights in the interim.
An application for leave to appeal against the order of the High Court which denied the applicants an opportunity to intervene in the proceedings concerning the confirmation of an interim order of the High Court. The interim order authorised the respondent and others to prevent persons from occupying or erecting structures on the land and to demolish structures erected thereon. The applicants unsuccessfully petitioned the Supreme Court of Appeal. They then approached the Constitutional Court, which held that the applicants had a direct and substantial interest and granted them leave to intervene in the confirmatory proceedings.
Main judgment: Zondo J (Moseneke ACJ, Skweyiya ADCJ, Cameron J, Dambuza AJ, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Madlanga J, and Majiedt AJ concurring).
Separate concurrences: Van der Westhuizen J (Froneman J concurring) and Moseneke ACJ (Skweyiya ADCJ, Cameron J, Dambuza AJ, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Madlanga J, and Majiedt AJ concurring).