Tenure security in urban rental housing
| dc.contributor.advisor | Van der Walt, A. J. | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.author | Maass, Sue-Mari | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.other | University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Law. Department of Public Law. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2010-11-12T11:31:44Z | en_ZA |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2010-12-15T10:42:26Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-11-12T11:31:44Z | en_ZA |
| dc.date.available | 2010-12-15T10:42:26Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2010-12 | |
| dc.description | Thesis (LLD (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. | |
| dc.description | Bibliography | |
| dc.description.abstract | ABSTRACT ENGLISH: The dissertation considers the tenure rights of urban residential tenants in the post-1994 constitutional dispensation. The 1996 Constitution mandates tenure reform in two instances. Firstly, section 25(6) (read with section 25(9)) mandates the legislature to enact legislation that would provide legally secure tenure rights for a person or community whose tenure of land is insecure as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practices. This form of tenure reform is race-based. Secondly, section 26(3) mandates the courts to consider all relevant circumstances during eviction proceedings. In terms of this provision the court can refuse to grant the eviction order on the basis of the occupier's socio-economic weakness, which is a more general form of class-related tenure reform. The Constitution also ensures the right to have access to adequate housing, while the legislature must introduce measures that would give effect to this right (sections 26(1) and 26(2)). To determine whether the current landlord-tenant regime in South Africa is able to provide tenants with secure occupation rights and access to rental housing, it is compared to landlord-tenant regimes in pre-1994 South Africa, the United Kingdom, New York State and Germany. The landlord-tenant regimes are considered in light of changing socio-economic circumstances where the state had to assist households during housing shortages. The dissertation assesses the efficiency of landlord-tenant law, combined with regulatory measures that ensure substantive tenure rights and rent restrictions, as a form of tenure that could help alleviate housing shortages and initiate a new landlord-tenant regime for South Africa that would give effect to the Constitution. The dissertation concludes that the current substantive tenure rights of urban residential tenants are largely based on the common law, which is associated with weak tenure security. The landlord-tenant laws, namely the Rental Housing Act 50 of 1999 and the Social Housing Act 16 of 2008, fail to provide urban residential tenants with substantive tenure rights. The legislature has failed to enact a law that gives effect to section 25(6) in the landlord-tenant framework. The legislature did enact the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 (PIE) in order to give effect to section 26(3). Recently the courts interpreted PIE to provide marginalized tenants with substantive tenure protection during eviction proceedings. However, to give effect to section 25(6) legislation should grant residential tenants substantive tenure rights that are legally secure prior to eviction. The legislature enacted the Rental Housing Act and the Social Housing Act to give effect to the right to housing (section 26 of the Constitution) in the landlord-tenant framework. These laws fail to promote access to rental housing as a form of tenure that could help alleviate housing shortages. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die proefskrif oorweeg die okkupasieregte van stedelike residensiële huurders in die post-1994 konstitusionele bedeling. Die 1996 Grondwet bepaal dat okkupasieregte in twee gevalle hervorm moet word. Eerstens gee artikel 25(6) (gelees met artikel 25(9)) opdrag aan die wetgewer om wetgewing te verorden wat okkupasieregte met verblyfsekerheid aan 'n person of gemeenskap sal verleen indien so 'n person of gemeenskap tans grond okkupeer met okkupasieregte wat onseker is as gevolg van vorige rasgebaseerde wetgewing. Hierdie tipe hervorming is rasgebaseer. Tweedens gee artikel 26(3) opdrag aan die howe om alle relevante faktore te oorweeg as deel van enige uitsettingsprosedure. In terme van hierdie bepaling is die howe gemagtig om 'n uitsettingsbevel te weier op die basis van die okkupeerder se sosio-ekonomiese kwesbaarheid. Hierdie tipe hervorming is 'n meer algemene klasgebaseerde hervorming. Artikel 26(1) (gelees met artikel 26(2)) van die Grondwet bepaal dat elkeen die reg op toegang tot geskikte behuising het, terwyl die staat redelike wetgewende en ander maatreëls moet tref om hierdie reg te verwesenlik. Ten einde te bepaal of die huidige huurbehuisingstelsel in Suid-Afrika voldoende is, met inagneming van die stelsel se vermoë om huurders te voorsien van okkupasieregte met verblyfsekerheid en van toegang tot huurbehuising, word dit vergelyk met die huurbehuisingstelsels in Suid Afrika voor 1994, die Verenigde Koninkryk, New York Staat en Duitsland. Hierdie huurbehuisingstelsels word bespreek met inagneming van veranderinge in die sosio-ekonomiese omstandighede waartydens die staat gedurende behuisingstekorte huishoudings moes ondersteun. Die doeltreffendheid van huurbehuising word beoordeel met verwysing na regulasies wat substantiewe okkupasieregte verseker en beperkings plaas op huurpryse om 'n vorm van verblyfreg daar te stel wat die behuisingstekort kan verminder ten einde 'n nuwe huurbehuisingstelsel vir Suid-Afrika te inisieër wat gevolg aan die Grondwet sal gee. Die proefskrif lei tot die gevolgtrekking dat die huidige substantiewe okkupasieregte van stedelike residensiële huurders grotendeels op die gemenereg gebaseer is. Die gemenereg maak nie voorsiening vir sterk substantiewe okkupasieregte nie. Die huidige huurbehuisingswetgewing, naamlik die Wet op Huurbehuising 50 van 1999 en die Wet op Maatskaplike Behuising 16 van 2008, slaag nie daarin om substantiewe okkupasieregte vir stedelike residensiële huurders te voorsien nie. Die wetgewer het nie daarin geslaag om 'n wet te promulgeer wat in die huurbehuisingsraamwerk aan artikel 25(6) effek gee nie. Die wetgewer het wel die Wet op die Voorkoming van Onwettige Uitsetting en Onregmatige Besetting van Grond 19 van 1998 verorden om effek te gee aan artikel 26(3) van die Grondwet. Hierdie Wet is onlangs so deur die howe geïnterpreteer dat dit kwesbare huurders tydens uitsettingsprosedures met substantiewe okkupasieregte beskerm. Om aan artikel 25(6) te voldoen moet wetgewing egter substantiewe okkupasieregte met verblyfsekerheid aan residensiële huurders verskaf voordat hulle uitgesit word. Die wetgewer het die Wet op Huurbehuising en die Wet op Maatskaplike Behuising verorden ten einde effek aan die reg op behuising (artikel 26 van die Grondwet) in die gebied van huurbehuising te gee. Geeneen van hierdie wette slaag daarin om toegang tot behuising, en veral huurbehuising as 'n vorm van okkupasie, te bevorder ten einde die behuisingtekort te verminder nie. | en_ZA |
| dc.format.extent | x, 476 p. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/5405 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch | |
| dc.rights.holder | University of Stellenbosch | |
| dc.subject | housing | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | tenure | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | lease | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | security | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Theses -- Law | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Dissertations -- Law | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.geog | South Africa -- Race relations -- Economic aspects | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.lcsh | Right to housing -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.lcsh | Housing -- Law and legislation -- South Africa | |
| dc.subject.lcsh | landlord and tenant -- Law and legislation -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.other | Public Law | en_ZA |
| dc.title | Tenure security in urban rental housing | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Thesis |