The High Court orders the return of Communicare property

Posted On Tuesday, 25 May 2021 00:46 Published by
Rate this item
(0 votes)

Communicare was victorious in its battle to have its property returned when the High Court ordered, on 24 May 2021, that 24 apartments that were illegally hijacked immediately be returned to the organisation.  

Anthea Houston CEO of Communicare

Communicare brought an urgent application on 30 March 2021 after the South African Police Services (SAPS) insisted that Communicare should apply to the courts for an eviction order when a mob of about 40 people violently overruled the security guards at its Goedehoop residential complex in Brooklyn.

SAPS failed to protect the lawful tenants and the property at that time, insisting that Communicare allow the highjackers access to the property.

The Court ordered that the hijackers of the apartments immediately vacate the premises that they have been illegally living in, since the first apartments were broken into on 2 March 2021.

The Court ordered that the units be returned to Communicare, the lawful owners of the property, with immediate effect and that the hijackers leave independently or be “ejected” by the Sheriff of the Court from the apartments.  

The Court returned control of the access gates, security points and common areas back to Communicare. The Court also noted that hijackers were interdicted and restrained from returning to the property.

“Our legal tenants are the real victims of this ordeal. Elderly tenants have been harassed, threatened and their apartments were broken into to make illegal water and electricity connections. The final hurdle is to urge the hijackers to leave peacefully. I trust that the law will be respected and that tenants can return to living in peace,” said Anthea Houston, CEO of Communicare.

The hijackers contested Communicare’s urgent application for relief claiming that they were legal tenants. To support their argument, they provided the court with receipts for electricity they had purchased. The judge found the claim of legal occupation “so far-fetched or clearly untenable” that it rejected the claims.

Last modified on Friday, 28 May 2021 00:52

Please publish modules in offcanvas position.