The Supreme Court of Appeal held on Wednesday that rules of a temporary shelter‚ one of which prohibited the spouses living together‚ were not unconstitutional. The court made this finding as it set aside a decision of the high court in Johannesburg last year.The high court had ruled that two rules of an overnight shelter infringed the shelter residents’ rights to dignity‚ freedom and security of person.The rules provided for the closure of entry to the shelter by 10pm every night‚ and that all residents vacate the shelter by 8am on Mondays to Fridays‚ and at 9am on Saturdays and Sundays.The high court had also ruled that the shelter’s refusal to permit the residents to reside in communal rooms together with their spouses was an infringement of their rights to dignity and privacy.The people were evicted from a dilapidated block of flats in the Johannesburg inner city in 2012.However the high court‚ and later the Constitutional Court‚ ordered that the City of Johannesburg provide them with temporary accommodation.“It needs to be emphasised that the order of the Constitutional Court was that the occupiers be provided with temporary accommodation and not that the City provide them with housing that was permanent in nature‚” Judge of Appeal Nigel Willis said in his judgment passed on Wednesday.The city of Johannesburg asked the Metropolitan Evangelical Services (MES)‚ a non-profit organisation‚ to provide shelter for the residents.In 2012‚ there were 33 occupiers and this number had reduced to 11.The occupation at MES can host 100 people‚ but because of the high court order‚ 89 beds that could be used are not in use.The shelter consists of 30 small dormitories‚ consisting of two to four bunks per dormitory. The dormitories were gender differentiated.Willis said the rules relating to entry and vacating the building were designed to ensure the safety and protection of the occupiers.“They are also intended to discourage an attitude of dependence.”He also said these rules could not be said to be unreasonable.Willis said the provision of temporary accommodation separated on the basis of gender was not unreasonable and therefore not unconstitutional. “In any event‚ husbands and wives and permanent life partners do not have the right‚ always and everywhere‚ to sleep together.”-TMG Digital..