A dispute involving the Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa, a building, a changed set of locks and two people who suddenly found themselves locked out has landed in the Western Cape High Court.
Dr Japie Jimmy La Poorta and Pastor Susan La Poorta approached the court urgently after the locks to a building were replaced, asking for their possession of the property to be restored.
The legal issue before the court was not whether La Poorta and his wife ultimately had a right to occupy the building but rather whether they had been in peaceful and undisturbed possession immediately before they were locked out.
The Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa argued that the couple had occupied the building as employees or agents of a Children’s Home, and that possession therefore belonged to the Children’s Home rather than to them personally.
They said the building had undergone renovations that stopped in February 2026 and that it was subsequently unoccupied.
Key doesn’t fit
Then, in May, the Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa noticed that a lock had been placed on the building and asked the La Poortas for the keys, since the church saw them as being representatives of the Children’s Home.
When the keys were not provided, the church removed the lock, changing them on 18 June 2026.
The La Poortas disputed this version, saying renovations had been temporarily paused because of funding or administrative timelines, but that they had remained in peaceful possession of the building.
The judge found that the La Poortas had exercised sufficient physical control over the property.
It was not disputed that they had barricaded the building and held the keys. The court found that they therefore had physical control over the building before they were deprived of access.
“They had physical control over the building before they were deprived of access,” the judge said of the La Poorta’s occupation of the property. That meant their possession had to be restored.
Can’t just change the locks
The Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa had already launched separate eviction proceedings against the church. That case will determine whether La Poorta and his wife actually have the right to remain in the building.
But while that question is still before the court, the Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa could not simply take matters into their own hands. The judge found that they had resorted to self-help by depriving the La Poortas of their possession.
The court therefore ordered the church to restore the applicants’ peaceful and undisturbed possession of the building and to hand them a complete set of keys to the replacement locks within 48 hours.
That does not mean La Poorta and his wife have won the underlying dispute.
The next question
The judge was explicit that the order did not determine their right or entitlement to occupy the property. That question remains to be decided in the pending eviction proceedings.
Beneath the unusual circumstances, the ruling makes the point that a person or organisation that believes someone has no right to occupy a property cannot simply remove them by changing the locks. Even where an eviction is being pursued, the proper legal process has to be followed.
For La Poorta and his wife, that means they get their access to the building back while the question of who ultimately has the right to occupy the building remains to be decided in the pending eviction proceedings.
IOL BUSINESS
