CAPE TOWN – In a powerful judgment that invokes the legacy of apartheid’s forced removals, the Western Cape High Court has set aside the eviction of Noor-Banu Allie, a 78-year-old pensioner who has lived in District Six for most of her life.
The appeal court’s decision, delivered on 14 November overturned a magistrate’s order that would have rendered. Allie homeless after nearly two decades of living at her current residence in F Street, District Six.
Allie came to South Africa from India as a toddler and has deep roots in District Six, having worked in her family’s shops and later as a nursing aide at Groote Schuur Hospital. She survived the devastating forced removals of the 1960s and 1970s that displaced over 60,000 people when the apartheid government declared the area a whites-only zone.
The case centered on an eviction application brought by Westminster Property Developments through their managing agent, Waleed Ras. The property owner claimed they needed to evict Allie to renovate the premises, arguing the property was unsafe and required extensive work.
However, Judge Vincent Saldanha, writing the appeal judgement, found the eviction application “legally untenable.” The court ruled that the landlord had failed to comply with the Unfair Practice Regulations under the Rental Housing Act, which requires specific procedures when seeking to remove tenants for renovations.
Critically, the regulations stipulate that if repairs cannot be made while a tenant remains, the landlord must allow remission of rent during the work period and ensure the tenant can return afterward. Allie had offered to temporarily relocate to a vacant property next door during renovations, but this proposal was repeatedly rejected.
The appeal court noted that the property owner opportunistically changed their legal argument mid-case, initially claiming renovations were necessary but later arguing they could terminate the month-to-month lease without any reason. Judge Saldanha described this shift as demonstrating “mala fides” or bad faith.
Allie’s personal circumstances painted a dire picture of what eviction would mean. As a pensioner receiving approximately R6,700 monthly, she conducted extensive research showing that affordable rental accommodation in Cape Town was beyond her reach, with average rents in surrounding areas exceeding R8,000 to R11,000.
Her attempts to secure alternative housing through the City of Cape Town’s social housing programs proved fruitless, as most institutions excluded pensioners or had no availability. The City’s housing report was criticised by the court as “most unhelpful” and leading Allie on “a wild goose chase.”
The judgment highlighted Allie’s failed attempts at land restitution. She had lodged claims for property at her cousin’s former butchery in Hanover Street, but the first claim was lost by the Land Claims Commission, and her second attempt was caught up in Constitutional Court litigation that put new claims on hold.
Judge Saldanha drew explicit parallels to District Six’s history, quoting extensively from the Constitutional Court’s description of forced removals’ “immeasurable emotional and psychological trauma” and noting the irony that the magistrate’s court ordering her eviction sits directly across from the District Six Museum.
The court found that the magistrate had failed to properly consider whether the eviction would be “just and equitable” as required by law, dismissing market research and displaying unexplained skepticism about Allie’s genuine inability to find alternative accommodation.
Westminster Property Developments chose not to oppose the appeal. Allie was represented pro bono by Advocate Adiel Nacerodien and the Ndifuna Ukwazi Law Centre, with the court ordering costs against the property owner.
ALSO READ: Over 100 illegal occupants to be evicted from hijacked state properties in Cape Town
You must be logged in to post a comment.