South African courts’ current definition of suitable alternative accommodation in eviction matters

Abstract

South Africa’s democracy is 30 years old, and for 30 years the courts have been interpreting the right of access to adequate housing found in section 26 of the Constitution. Many parts of this right have been developed; one such development is that courts have found that the right includes a duty on the state to provide (temporary) emergency alternative accommodation in eviction matters to those facing homelessness. Throughout the years, courts have grappled with the suitability of this alternative accommodation; it finally seems like some clarity has been reached regarding when alternative accommodation would be considered suitable, due to the courts’ recent acceptance of alternative accommodation offered by the state as suitable. This article considers how the courts currently determine the suitability of emergency accommodation and what types of alternative accommodation has been accepted; it further explores the issues arising from these findings.