South African rental arrears edge up as courts reaffirm the rules landlords must follow before eviction

South African tenants are under increasing pressure as rents continue to rise, with 16.9% in arrears in the second quarter of 2026, according to the latest PayProp Rental Index. The proportion of tenants in arrears edged up from 16.7% in the first quarter, although it remains close to historic lows, and tenants who were behind owed an average 73.5% of one month's rent, down from 74.3% in the previous quarter.

Average residential rent reached a record R9,715 in the second quarter, an increase of R133 from the previous quarter and 5.2% higher than a year earlier, IOL reported.

Two recent High Court judgments illustrate that non-payment can ultimately lead to eviction, and that landlords must follow the required process first. In a judgment handed down last week, the KwaZulu-Natal High Court ordered tenants who had occupied a Durban property without paying rent for more than 12 years to leave in the matter of Strydom N.O and Another v Phili and Others, a dispute that stretched back to 2014 and in which an earlier cancellation was found unlawful in 2019 because the landlord had not given sufficient notice. After fresh notice in 2025, the court found the lease had been lawfully cancelled and ordered the tenants to leave by 15 October 2026.

A Johannesburg case decided on 23 July 2026, RED R7 (Pty) Ltd v Seroka and Another, reached a similar result after a tenant fell into arrears shortly after taking occupation. By April 2025 the landlord's account showed arrears of R188,579.96, which the tenant disputed; the court made no finding on the exact amount owed, saying the landlord could pursue the debt separately, and gave the household until 21 September 2026 to leave after considering that it included two minor children.

Residential evictions in South Africa are governed by the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, known as PIE, which requires a court order before an unlawful occupier can be evicted and obliges courts to consider whether an eviction would be just and equitable. Where an occupier has lived on a property for more than six months, the law expressly requires the court to consider relevant circumstances, including whether alternative accommodation can reasonably be made available.

Recent cases also show landlords can come unstuck if they bypass the court process. In Lukhele and Others v Humayl Properties, occupiers were removed from a Randburg property while an eviction application was still pending; the Gauteng High Court found the eviction unlawful, ordered possession restored immediately and barred the owners from changing locks, disconnecting utilities or intimidating the occupants. In Dikgwathle v Phetheni, decided on 12 June 2026, the North West High Court set aside an eviction after finding that a private notice to vacate was not the court-authorised notice required under the legislation, which must reach the occupier and municipality at least 14 days before a hearing.

The rules could change further: Cabinet approved publication of the draft PIE Amendment Bill for public comment at its 25 March 2026 meeting, with proposals intended to address illegal land invasions and property owners' rights while retaining protections against arbitrary eviction. For tenants struggling to pay, the recent judgments draw a distinction between owing money and being evicted: non-payment can lead to a lease being cancelled and ultimately to a court order to leave, but until that process has been followed, a landlord cannot take the law into their own hands.