The case concerned the proposed disposal of the Tafelberg property, situated at 355 Main Road, Sea Point, Cape Town. The property was owned by the Western Cape Provincial Government and had previously housed the Tafelberg Remedial School and Wynyard Mansions. After the school and residential units ceased operating, the property stood vacant. The Province later resolved to dispose of the property, and the proposed sale was challenged by individual applicants and civil-society organisations who argued that the site was well-located public land capable of advancing affordable and social housing in an area historically shaped by apartheid spatial exclusion.

The judgment is significant for the protection and advancement of the rights of access to adequate housing and equitable access to land. The Court confirmed that, in taking reasonable legislative and other measures to progressively realise these rights, the location of housing must be treated as a relevant factor, particularly where public land decisions may affect efforts to redress apartheid spatial injustice. The Constitutional Court held that the obligations of the Western Cape Provincial Government and the City of Cape Town under sections 25(5), 26(1) and 26(2) of the Constitution require measures that respond to the constitutional imperative to redress spatial injustice. The Court declared that the Province and the City failed to comply with their obligations in the implementation and completion of their respective social housing programmes, policies and projects in the Cape Town CBD and Sea Point.

The Commission also notes the Court’s findings on meaningful public participation. The Court declared that the Province failed to meaningfully engage the public in relation to the disposal of the Tafelberg property. The Court also declared certain regulations under the Western Cape Land Administration Act, unconstitutional and invalid because they allowed public participation in a land-disposal process to take place only after a disposal contract had already been concluded. The declaration of invalidity was suspended for 12 months.

 The judgment reinforces that public land-disposal decisions must be approached consistently with applicable statutory requirements, meaningful public participation, and the State’s constitutional obligations.

The Commission has previously raised concerns with the City of Cape Town regarding the public auction of municipal properties in February 2026. Those concerns include whether the City adequately considered the housing and spatial justice implications of the proposed disposals, whether meaningful and current public participation took place, and whether enforceable public-interest or affordable housing conditions were considered before irreversible alienation of municipal land.

In light of the Constitutional Court’s judgment the Commission is considering the implications of the decision for possible further steps within its constitutional and statutory mandate, including in relation to the City of Cape Town’s February 2026 municipal land auctions. The Commission emphasises that its concern is not that municipal land may never be disposed of, nor that every parcel of public land must be used for social housing. The concern is that where public land is alienated, particularly well-located land, the decision must be preceded by a lawful, properly informed, and constitutionally compliant process.

The Commission will continue to assess the judgment and its implications and will communicate any further steps in due course.

ENDS

Issued by the South African Human Rights Commission