A Durban family that has occupied a rental property for more than 12 years without paying rent has been ordered to vacate the home, following a lengthy legal battle dating back to 2014.
The KwaZulu-Natal High Court in Pietermaritzburg ordered the couple, identified in court papers as HP and YI, and their five children to leave the Newlands East property by 15 October 2026.
According to an IOL report on the judgment, the family entered into a lease agreement in 2014 but has not paid rent since that year. The dispute has since resulted in years of litigation, including an earlier unsuccessful attempt by the landlord to have the family evicted.
01/05
Get seen where South Africa reads.
Homepage, category & newsletter placements.
02/05
Own the homepage. Just for a day.
Takeovers & sponsored placements, built to spec.
03/05
Don't wait for the 6 o'clock news.
Follow The Baseline on Facebook.
04/05
Straight to your phone. Before anyone else's.
Follow The Baseline on WhatsApp Channels.
05/05
News, refined.
No noise. Just the story.
Should the family remain in the property beyond the October deadline, the sheriff has been authorised to carry out the eviction from 20 October. The couple was also ordered to pay the legal costs of the application.
The property is owned by FMHC Rental SA NPC, a company currently under business rescue.
In 2019, the High Court ruled that the landlord’s initial cancellation of the lease in 2014 was unlawful because the tenants had not been given sufficient time to remedy the breach before the agreement was terminated. The eviction application based on that cancellation was consequently dismissed.
The latest proceedings, however, followed a fresh breach notice and cancellation process.
In 2025, the tenants were issued with a notice giving them a month to remedy their failure to pay rent. The period expired at the end of May without the breach being remedied.
The lease was subsequently cancelled on 29 July 2025, with the occupants given a calendar month to leave the property.
The family challenged the latest proceedings on the basis of res judicata, a legal principle that generally prevents a dispute that has already been finally decided by a court from being litigated again.
Judge Sibiya rejected the argument, finding that the 2019 proceedings concerned the legality of the 2014 cancellation, while the latest case concerned a separate breach and the cancellation issued in 2025.
The family also argued that eviction could leave them homeless.
Under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, commonly known as the PIE Act, courts must consider whether an eviction is just and equitable, including the circumstances of vulnerable occupants and whether alternative accommodation is available where homelessness may result.
The court found that the family had not provided sufficient information to establish that they could not afford alternative accommodation or that eviction would necessarily leave them homeless.
The judgment also recorded conflicting information about the couple’s employment circumstances. The wife described herself in her affidavit as the household’s breadwinner, while her husband told the court they had been unemployed since 2016. The judge noted that the latter information had not been submitted under oath.
Judge Sibiya found that the property was intended as rental accommodation and that its owners were not responsible for providing the occupants with free housing.
The court also considered FMHC Rental SA’s business rescue proceedings, finding that continued occupation of the property without rental payments prevented the company from placing paying tenants in the home.
The court ultimately found that the 2025 cancellation was lawful and that there was no valid legal basis for the family to continue occupying the property without paying rent.
Despite the length of time the family has occupied the home, the court found that six weeks was sufficient time for them to leave.
The eviction was declared just and equitable, with the family ordered to vacate by 15 October. Should they fail to do so, the sheriff can enforce the eviction from 20 October.
