A 69-year-old woman faces a legal battle against her eviction from the Haven Night Shelter, highlighting the urgent need for reform in homelessness policies as Human Rights Day approaches.
Image: File
As Human Rights Day approaches a 69-year-old woman awaits judgment in her court battle against an alleged unlawful eviction from the Haven Night Shelter. Sheree Foggitt is challenging the actions of the MEC for Social Development and two other respondents.
Foggitt is seeking justice, calling for increased attention to homelessness. After her eviction, she spent 16 days sleeping outside. She is represented by Legal Aid South Africa in her legal fight.
"I have had a very difficult time but I am grateful to Legal Aid SA for bringing my matter to the court and only wish for my truth to be reflected,” said Foggitt, after the matter was heard by the Western Cape High Court on Friday.
Judgment was reserved in the matter.
The Cape Argus was provided with the heads of argument in this case, detailing the positions of the involved parties. The applicant, namely Foggitt, is contesting the actions of the Haven Night Shelter, the MEC for Social Development, Jaco Londt, the City of Cape Town, and the Minister of Social Development, each of whom has presented their case.
In response to the court’s decision, Renaat Bodart, Head of Legal Aid SA Malmesburg Local Office said the case expanded on the larger issue of homelessness: "We await the court's judgment and remain positive and still hope that the courts would assist in guiding on the appropriateness of the application of the PIE Act in situations of homeless or destitute persons in shelters"
Londt’s office said it was still early days to provide their view: "The matter was argued before a full bench (consisting of 3 judges), and judgment has been reserved,” said DSD.
“The Department cannot provide any further comment while the matter is before the court.”
The Haven Night Shelter did not respond to queries, and the City said that the Haven Night Shelter was best suited to respond.
According to the Heads of Argument court papers, Foggitt, a pensioner, seeks final relief after being unlawfully evicted from the shelter on January 23, 2025, without a court order or PIE Act compliance, violating her Constitutional rights to dignity, housing, and social assistance, as well as the Older Persons Act.
Court papers state that Foggit initially resided at the Haven Night Shelter in Kalk Bay shelter, and that she was subsequently encouraged by the facility to transfer to their Malmesbury shelter in early 2024 with the understanding that she would remain there until a placement became available at an old age home.
Her combined occupancy across both shelters' totals about one year, eleven months, and 17 days- significantly exceeding a temporary stay. During this period, she relied on the shelter as her home.
“Upon arrival at the Malmesbury shelter she was given shelter rules, including Rule 15, which states that unemployed individuals were to be charged R470 per month,” the document stated.
“She was however charged R1200 per month - an overreach and exploitation of her vulnerable position. On November 25, 2024, she received notice that she would be evicted unless full fees were paid by December 4, 2024. She was removed from the shelter on January 23, 2025.”
The court papers further state that Foggitt was transported by shelter staff to the Haven Head Office in Green Point and then to SafeSpace in Cape Town, which rejected her due to her age. With nowhere to go, she was abandoned at the DSD regional office in Queen Victoria Street and forced to sleep outside.
Foggitt seeks declaratory relief, in that: the eviction was unlawful and violated her Constitutional and statutory rights and that the shelter’s policy allowing removal by SAPS or security without a court order is unconstitutional/PIE Act-inconsistent, that the shelter must cease unlawful evictions and develop a PIE Act-compliant eviction framework including that they violated her Constitutional rights.
Mandatory Relief is also sought, in that the respondents must provide detailed information on services and facilities for homeless individuals over 60, and a plan to address service gaps.
The Haven Night Shelter opposed this and argued that the PIE Act does not apply because their shelter is temporary, for a finite social work purpose, not a "home."
It said applying the PIE Act would negatively impact its ability to provide services and that the termination was lawful under its admissions policy and rules due to Foggitt’s non-payment, behavioural issues, and refusal to participate in interventions.
It went further to state that it does not bear the constitutional housing and social security obligations of the State.
The MEC and the Minister also opposed, Foggitt’s arguments and the ministry initiated legislation (Older Persons Act) for the her circumstances.
The City said it opposes only the relief sought against it, arguing it is factually unsubstantiated, jurisdictionally flawed, and constitutionally impermissible, especially since it provided interim accommodation.