KEY POINTS
- Johannesburg’s disregard for a court order leads to financial damages.
- Changing Tides lost rental income due to the city’s delay.
- The city’s actions were considered reckless and wrongful by the judge.
After disregarding a court order to provide interim housing for those evicted from Chung Hua Mansions on Jeppe Street, the City of Johannesburg will now pay damages of about R12.4 million.
Johannesburg’s failure to provide housing leads to costly damages
The building’s owner, Changing Tides 74 Ltd, obtained a court order in 2012 requiring 247 inhabitants to leave the 11-story building that had been taken over. Prior to the eviction, the city had to find the residents temporary housing. Nevertheless, the city disregarded the court’s directive, causing the occupants to be evicted only in 2017.
Changing Tides asserted that the city’s inaction on the court decision cost it three years’ worth of rental money, even though the building was ultimately turned into student housing. The three-year period began when the city’s appeals were denied and the Constitutional Court published its final decision.
According to Iol, the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, which had originally issued the injunction, received a demand for monetary damages from Changing Tides.
The court had mandated that the city provide temporary housing for the squatters by January 30, 2013, and that they be removed by February 15, 2013. The occupiers, however, filed an enforcement application in December 2012 after the city failed to cooperate. The owner was forced to keep hosting the displaced people after the city promised to comply then broke the agreement.
In 2015, the city’s appeal was turned down by the Constitutional Court and refused by the Supreme Court of Appeal.
City’s failure to act deemed reckless by the judge
In its claim, Changing Tides contended that the occupiers were forced to live in hazardous and degrading conditions as a result of the city’s noncompliance with the court order, which also resulted in financial loss. The business also claimed that the city had denied it property rights because it was unable to rent out or renovate the building during the three years that the legal proceedings took.
Judge Dephny Mahosi was informed that although Changing Tides should have been allowed to start leasing the property and renovating it in February 2014, these actions were not possible until February 2017.
However, Changing Tides contended that the city’s inaction was caused by a lack of political will rather than a lack of resources, characterizing the city’s actions as “grossly reckless.” In agreement, the judge declared that the city’s acts were wrong and that the city must be held accountable for Changing Tides’ damages in accordance with the Constitution’s definition of public policy.
