Farm dwellers stay - for now

29 August 2011 - 02:32 By NASHIRA DAVIDS
subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now
A resident of Stofland informal settlement fixes the roof of his home
A resident of Stofland informal settlement fixes the roof of his home

It was a classic David and Goliath battle that lasted for almost five years - the children of poor farm labourers versus winery giant Nederburg Wine Farms.

This month Piet Bester and his sisters, Renee Bester and Miriam Hermanus, were declared victors in the Cape Town High Court after fighting to continue living in the farmhouse that has been their home for about 27 years.

At least for now.

"I don't have much, but I will continue to fight to live in this house. I have to because I have nowhere else to go," said Piet.

The Besters' parents were labourers and their father moved into the house in 1984 while working as a tractor driver. None of the three children works on the farm.

After both their parents had died, Nederburg on September 13 2006 served the children with notices to vacate the premises. They had just three months in which to pack up. When they failed to do so, they again were given a notice to quit in 2008.

An NGO, the Black Association of the Wine and Spirit Industry, appointed lawyer Marius Abrahams to represent them in the Paarl Magistrate's Court when Nederburg decided to apply for an eviction order.

The court ruled against the eviction. The magistrate found that the three had not merely occupied the house but were there because they were dependants of their parents.

Nederburg then sought to appeal the finding in the high court, arguing that, despite notices to vacate, the family continued to "unlawfully" occupy the house for 44 months.

The NGO could not afford counsel in the high court and Abrahams said all they could do was "leave the matter in the court's hands".

In her ruling, Judge Pearl Mantame slated Nederburg, saying the company's attitude was "unfortunate" and that it should have found a "dignified way", within the confines of "ubuntu", of dealing with the eviction.

She said Nederburg did not take the family's standard of living into account or the fact that the children had lived there for most of their lives.

She dismissed Nederburg's appeal and found that the family should be given a further 12-month notice period to find alternative accommodation.

Heidi Bartis, communications manager for Distell, said the company would obtain further legal advice.

subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now