ntral, well-located area.
Key Court History
- 2020 Western Cape High Court: Ruled in favour of the activists. It set aside the sale as unlawful, found that the province and City of Cape Town failed in their constitutional obligations to address spatial apartheid and provide access to well-located affordable housing, and issued broader orders. The sale was effectively cancelled after the buyer withdrew.
- April 2024 Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA): Overturned key parts of the High Court ruling. It held that the sale was lawful, that there is no constitutional obligation to provide housing in a specific location, and that the province and city had complied with their duties.
- February 2025 ConCourt hearing: Activists appealed the SCA decision. Judgment was reserved.
Today’s ConCourt Judgment (2 July 2026)
The Constitutional Court has now ruled in favour of the applicants on key points:
- Declared the province’s disposal/sale of the Tafelberg site unlawful, citing inadequate public participation and failure to consult the National Minister of Human Settlements.
- Found that both the Western Cape Government and the City of Cape Town breached their constitutional obligations under sections 25(5) and 26 of the Constitution (related to equitable access to land and the right to adequate housing). They failed to take sufficient steps to provide affordable housing in well-located areas like the CBD and Sea Point, thereby perpetuating apartheid spatial patterns.
- Issued supervisory orders requiring the governments to report back to the court on plans and steps to fulfil these housing obligations.
The site itself had already been earmarked for affordable housing development following earlier proceedings, but this ruling has significant broader implications for how public land is disposed of and for social housing policy in well-located urban areas.
