- Eviction order overturned after court finds major legal and procedural violations.
- Xolani Mkhokheli’s life-right tenure on the farm is protected under law.
- The judgment sets a precedent for fair process and dignity in future land disputes.
For Xolani Mkhokheli, the farmhouse on Protea Ridge in Bathurst is more than just walls and a roof. It’s where he has poured decades of hard work, raised his family, and built a life rooted in the land. Since 1979, Mkhokheli has tended the fields, planted trees, and watched generations grow. The farm is his home, his history, and his hope.
But in 2022, everything he had built was threatened. The new landowner, PSST (Pty) Ltd, secured an eviction order from the Magistrates’ Court, demanding that Mkhokheli and his loved ones leave the only home they had ever known.
The eviction order, granted on 4 August 2022, was riddled with mistakes. Proper notices, as required by the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (ESTA), were never issued. Not everyone in the household was informed. No probation officer’s report was sought. Each of these steps is meant to protect families like the Mkhokhelis from being uprooted without cause.
When the case reached the Land Court, Judge Spilg saw through the rushed process. The court found that the eviction was not just a technical error, but a fundamental failure to respect the rights and dignity of people who have given their lives to the land.
The right to stay
Central to the case was the law that protects elderly farm occupiers. Section 8(4) of ESTA says that anyone over 60 who has lived on a farm for more than a decade has the right to stay. Mkhokheli, born in 1959 and resident for over 40 years, fit every requirement. Still, the new owners tried to claim his right depended on their goodwill, a stance the court rejected.
Judge Spilg made it clear that life-right tenure is a legal right, not a privilege. A proposal to move Mkhokheli from his brick home to a log structure was found inadequate and disrespectful, especially given promises made by the previous owner. The court ruled that “suitable alternative accommodation” must meet real standard and protect the dignity of those who live there.
The landowners also accused Mkhokheli of misconduct, but the court found no proof that could justify eviction. More importantly, the judge criticised the lack of honest, meaningful engagement with Mkhokheli and his family. Legal processes, the court said, must be transparent, fair, and compassionate, and never rushed or dismissive.
The judgment highlighted the need for mediation and support from the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, emphasising that laws exist to serve real people, not just paperwork.
The court set aside the eviction order and declared the notices invalid. Any future attempts to remove Xolani must follow new, stricter legal standards and genuinely engage everyone involved. A remote hearing was held on 26 September 2025 to ensure all rights and processes are fully respected.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
