According to the judgment, the city said it had offered Phillips alternative accommodation but he refused to take it.
“Mr Phillips’ construction of his home, together with being peaceful and undisturbed possession thereof, established his constitutional rights, which have been zealously grabbed from him without care for his dignity and other enshrined values of our constitution, his rights in terms of our law, and with his humanity simply having been commoditised.
Salie-Hlophe said although the city is under pressure to provide housing, in accordance with the constitution, it should act lawfully. "Whilst the city claims that this property is on an environmentally protected sand dune, there is no suggestion that the other structures were similarly causing harm. I find this inconceivable given that the structures are in very close proximity, as per the case of informal settlement. No similar action was taken by the city was taken in terms of those structures, nor are any averments made by the [city] to that effect.
“The judgment is a victory to the community, but it is a sad situation that communities have to go to this length for the city to deal with us in a dignified manner. This proves what we have been saying for years.”