PRB seeks to vacate 104 Mead Road tenants
The lawyer said the tenants were not opposed to vacating the building but were concerned about the impact on the mostly low-income families who depended on the rental homes.
Thursday 13 August 2026 | 09:30
The Public Rental Board (PRB) has filed a civil case seeking orders for 104 tenants to vacate its rental homes at Mead Road, Nabua, to allow renovations to the 61-year-old building.
The matter was called before Justice Anjala Wati yesterday, with legal representatives for both sides appearing.
The PRB is seeking the orders under Section 169 of the Land Transfer Act 1971, arguing that the building, which has stood since 1965, is unstable and poses a significant risk of collapse.
Related stories
The tenants’ lawyer from Tufani Law said the firm had only recently received the file and sought 21 days to file a response.
The lawyer said the tenants were not opposed to vacating the building but were concerned about the impact on the mostly low-income families who depended on the rental homes.
He said the PRB could have carried out the renovations in stages, for example, by relocating about 10 families at a time.
He said requiring all 104 tenants to leave could result in some families becoming homeless.
The lawyer also argued that the PRB had responsibilities arising from its agreements with the tenants.
Justice Wati questioned why no formal defence had been filed, noting that the respondents were served on May 14.
She acknowledged the tenants’ right to housing but said this did not give them a reason to remain on the premises.
Justice Wati said the tenancy arrangements with the PRB were not for life and tenants were required to abide by their landlord’s rules.
The court noted that the application was filed last December and that the tenants had been informed of the PRB’s renovation plans.
Justice Wati also questioned who would be held responsible if the building collapsed if it did not comply with occupational health and safety requirements.
PRB lawyer Shelvin Singh sought an order requiring the respondents to provide details of the tenants’ personal insurance.
Mr Singh also told the court that the Government paid a significant portion of the tenants’ rent.
Justice Wati said that without good reasons for the tenants to remain, she would order them to vacate.
“If they keep playing cat and mouse, I will vacate them because I intend to do so,” she said.
The respondents were asked to address the legal balance between Sections 39 and 8 of the 2013 Constitution, concerning protection from eviction and the right to life.
The respondents have until Friday to file their affidavit in response.
Justice Wati will hear the matter on August 21.
