IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN
Not Reportable
Case no: 4073/2023
In the matter between:
FREE STATE WHEELS (PTY) LTD Applicant
[Reg. No: 2022/647862/07]
and
GRANNY LILY RATSELANE N.O. 1
st Respondent
[In her representative capacity as trustee for the time and
being of the Ratselane Familie Trust, IT844/04(B)]
MOLEFI ISAAC RATSELANE N.O. 2
nd Respondent
[In his representative capacity as trustee for the time and
being of the Ratselane Family Trust, IT844/04(B)]
GRANNY LILY RATSELANE 3rd Respondent
MOLEFI ISAAC RATSELANE 4th Respondent
ANY OTHER UNLAWFUL OCCUPIERS OF SECTIONAL
TITLE UNIT 2 AND 3, SS KOEDOE STREET 174, SCHEME
NUMBER AND YEAR 34/2014 5
th Respondent
MANGAUNG METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY 6
th Respondent
Neutral citation: Free State Wheels (Pty) Ltd v GL Ratselane N.O. and Others
(4073/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 216 (15 July 2025)
Coram: Van Zyl J
Heard: 30 January 2025
Delivered: 15 July 2025
Summary: Application for eviction in terms of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from
and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, 19 of 1998. Appointment of amicus curiae on
behalf of opposing respondents.
2
ORDER
1 The Chairperson of the Free State Society of Advocates, Adv N Snellenburg
SC, is requested and appointed to act as amicus curiae on behalf of the first to fifth
respondents in the present application.
2 The aforesaid request and appointment is subject to the proviso that Adv
Snellenburg may, without further leave of the Court, request junior counsel to assist
him and/or to act in his stead.
3 The application is postponed to a date to be agreed upon between the parties,
subject to the dates referred to in paragraph 4, infra.
4 The time periods for leave to file supplementary affidavits (if any) granted by
Daffue, J on 21 November 2024, are extended as follows:
4.1 Leave is granted to the first to fifth respondents to file a supplementary
answering affidavit and/or a counter application, if any, on or before 5 August 2025;
and
4.2 Should the first to fifth respondents file any of the papers referred to in
paragraph 4.1, supra, leave is granted to the applicant to respond thereto in terms of
the Court Rules, wherafter the further proceedings are also to follow in terms of the
Court Rules.
5 Supplementary heads of argument on behalf of the applicant and heads of
argument on behalf of the first to fifth respondents, irrespective of whether further
papers are filed or not, are to be filed in terms of the Rules of Practice.
6 The costs occasioned by the postponement stand over for later adjudication.
7 The Registrar is to forthwith serve a copy of this order on the secretary of Adv
Snellenburg, marked for the urgent attention of Adv Snellenburg, at the e-mail address
melissa@law.co.za.
3
8 The fourth respondent is ordered to forthwith, on behalf of the respondents,
make contact with the aforesaid secretary of Adv Snellenburg in order to make
arrangements for the urgent implementation of this order.
JUDGMENT
Van Zyl J
[1] On 10 August 2023 an order authorising the institution of these proceedings in
terms of section 4(1) of Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of
Land Act, 19 of 1998 (‘PIE’), was issued.
[2] The part of the application which is currently serving before me is that the first to
fifth respondents be declared to be unlawful occupiers of the property situated at
Sectional Title Unit 2 & 3, 174 Koedoe Street, Fauna, Bloemfontein (‘the property’),
and be ordered to vacate the property.
[3] The first to fifth respondents are opposing the application and I will refer to them
jointly as “the respondents”.
[4] Without dealing with the factual issues and making any finding in regard thereto,
in terms of the answering affidavit the fourth respondent and three of his
grandchildren, two of whom are still minors, reside at the property as their primary
residence.
[5] The present application has served before Court on a number of occasions and
has been postponed on those occasions. I do not propose to deal with all the
postponements.
[6] However, from a perusal of the file, it is evident that although the respondents
were initially legally represented, their attorney of record withdrew on 21 September
2023. A new attorney of record was appointed on or about 4 October 2023. On 5
October 2023, the application was postponed to the opposed roll of 18 January 2024,
with certain rulings regarding the filing of papers. The respondents answering affidavit
4
was filed on 25 October 2023. On 18 January 2024 the application was postponed to
22 February 2024. The respondents` second attorney of record then withdrew on 23
January 2024. The application was thereafter postponed during dates which the fourth
respondent appeared in person on behalf of the respondents, indicating that he
applied to the Legal Aid Board for legal representation. The said application was
unsuccessful and the respondents appealed the said decision of the Legal Aid Board.
That appeal, however, was also unsuccessful.
[7] Eventually, on 21 November 2024, the matter served before Daffue, J, during
which appearance the fourth respondent again appeared in person. Daffue, J granted
an order by agreement between the parties in terms whereof the application was
postponed to 30 January 2025, with leave to the respondents to file a supplementary
answering affidavit, leave to the applicant to file a supplementary replying affidavit and
further determinations regarding the filing of the parties’ respective heads of argument.
It is evident from the said order that at that stage the fourth respondent indicated that
he had instructed a new attorney to represent the respondents.
[8] On 30 January 2025 when the application served before me, the fourth
respondent again appeared in person on behalf of the respondents. The applicant duly
filed heads of argument and Mr Van Aswegen appeared on behalf of the applicant. No
heads of argument had been filed on behalf of the respondents. The fourth respondent
indicated that he has been unable to obtain the services of a new attorney of record on
behalf of the respondents. Mr Van Aswegen indicated that it was his instruction to
continue with the application and he addressed me on the merits of the application.
Thereafter the fourth respondent attempted to also address me on the merits of the
application on behalf of the respondents. I reserved judgment.
[9] The right to adequate housing is entrenched in section 26 of the Constitution:
[9] The right to adequate housing is entrenched in section 26 of the Constitution:
‘(1) Everyone has the right to have access to adequate housing.
(2) The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available
resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of this right.
(3) No one may be evicted from their home, or have their home demolished, without an order
of court made after considering all the relevant circumstances. No legislation may permit
arbitrary evictions.’
5
[20] The purpose of and the Preamble to PIE are indicative thereof that the Act is to
protect the aforesaid constitutional right to adequate housing.
[21] Without dealing with the merits of the application, it suffices to state that the
application deals with intrinsic legal principles which are set against the backdrop of an
unusual set of facts. The fourth respondent, as a layperson with regard to the law, was
and is in no position to properly represent the respondents in the application. The
Court has also up to now been without the advantage of full legal argument on the
relevant legal issues on behalf of all parties (with no detracting from the competent
argument presented by Mr Van Aswegen).
[22] In addition it is evident that the respondents have bona fide been attempting their
level best to secure legal representation, but without success.
[23] The parties previously agreed that further papers be filed and Daffue, J included
it in a court order. In my view it is evident from the papers that additional issues need
to be addressed. As previously mentioned, as of yet no heads of argument have even
been filed on behalf of the respondents.
Conclusion
[24] When taking all of the facts and circumstances into consideration, I deem it in
the interest of justice that an amicus curiae appointment be made, which amicus
curiae is to act on behalf of the first to fifth respondents, and that an order regarding
the filing of further papers also be made.
Order
[25] The following order is made:
1 The Chairperson of the Free State Society of Advocates, Adv N Snellenburg
SC, is requested and appointed to act as amicus curiae on behalf of the first to fifth
respondents in the present application.
6
2 The aforesaid request and appointment is subject to the proviso that Adv
Snellenburg may, without further leave of the Court, request junior counsel to assist
him and/or to act in his stead.
3 The application is postponed to a date to be agreed upon between the parties,
subject to the dates referred to in paragraph 4, infra.
4 The time periods for leave to file supplementary affidavits (if any) granted by
Daffue, J on 21 November 2024, are extended as follows:
4.1 Leave is granted to the first to fifth respondents to file a supplementary
answering affidavit and/or a counter application, if any, on or before 5 August 2025;
and
4.2 Should the first to fifth respondents file any of the papers referred to in
paragraph 4.1, supra, leave is granted to the applicant to respond thereto in terms of
the Court Rules, wherafter the further proceedings are also to follow in terms of the
Court Rules.
5 Supplementary heads of argument on behalf of the applicant and heads of
argument on behalf of the first to fifth respondents, irrespective of whether further
papers are filed or not, are to be filed in terms of the Rules of Practice.
6 The costs occasioned by the postponement stand over for later adjudication.
7 The Registrar is to forthwith serve a copy of this order on the secretary of Adv
Snellenburg, marked for the urgent attention of Adv Snellenburg, at the e- mail address
melissa@law.co.za.
8 The fourth respondent is ordered to forthwith, on behalf of the respondents,
make contact with the aforesaid secretary of Adv Snellenburg in order to make
arrangements for the urgent implementation of this order.
VAN ZYL J
Appearances:
7
For the Applicant: Adv WA van Aswegen
Instructed by: Symington & de Kok Inc. (FKR0052)
BLOEMFONTEIN
E-mail: gdutoit@symok.co.za
For the First to Fifth
Respondents: In Person
E-mail: isaacratselane@gmail.com
Cell: 082 718 1838
078 211 0615