The business occupied the municipality's property without a lease agreement, and even sublet the property to third parties.
The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg has ruled in favour of the Lesedi Local Municipality against a business that had been occupying the municipality’s property without signing a lease agreement.
The municipality approached the court in a bid to force Heidelberg Beer Festival CC, run by Bouwe Wiersma, out of the Heidelberg Heritage Museum.
Wiersma opposed the municipality’s application, saying he had been “in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the property and had operated a business there under a 19-year lease term, which was an improved term of the initial five years”.
ALSO READ: How to get rid of a squatting tenant
He told the court he had occupied the building since 2016 and commenced business operations in 2019.
The businessman did apply to lease the property from the municipality. The municipal council approved the lease of the property to Wiersma; however, no lease agreement was concluded.
He proceeded to occupy the property without signing a lease agreement and further sublet the property to third parties to conduct their business without the municipality’s consent.
Electricity charges
The municipality argued that Wiersma did not settle the electricity charges until the municipality cut the electricity supply.
The business to which he sublet parts of the property was forced to spend money on a generator.
He further refused to move out of the property despite the municipality’s numerous correspondences and multiple court actions against him.
ALSO READ: Here’s a list of what your landlord is responsible for in your rented flat
The businessman even lodged a complaint with the municipality regarding the building’s condition and also notified the South African Police Service (Saps) in writing of these concerns.
In response, the municipality instructed Wiersma to cease business operations and vacate the premises on safety grounds for the public.
Only the business that was subletting from Wiersma moved out, but he remained.
‘Municipality’s application not urgent’
The municipality then approached the court in an attempt to evict the businessman, arguing that he had failed to pay electricity charges, with arrears exceeding R1.3 million.
The businessman argued that the municipality’s application was not urgent as the building’s condition “does not endanger the public who may be patrons at the business”.
On Monday, Judge Makamu ordered Heidelberg Beer Festival CC to stop conducting business at the Heidelberg Heritage Museum with immediate effect.
ALSO READ: Your rights when you rent a place to stay
“The building was declared dilapidated by members of the Saps after the respondent lodged a complaint. Nonetheless, the respondent now claims that only the Rotarian building requires attention and that the portion he occupies is safe. However, the inspection report clearly refers to the Heidelberg Heritage Museum as a whole,” said Judge Makamu.
“The respondent has no legal basis to oppose this application, as it is an unlawful occupier. However, the Municipality’s inaction from 2019 to 2025 – a period of six years – suggests that it condoned the respondent’s continued presence on the property, whether expressly or by inaction.”
The business was ordered to move out of the museum within seven days; failing which, the Sheriff of the Court will evict it. He was also ordered to pay costs.
READ NEXT: Nearly one in five tenants behind in rentals
