The City of Cape Town has been ordered to amend its housing allocation policy amid accusations of discrimination against women. 

The order was granted on Wednesday in the Equality Court, sitting in the Western Cape High Court, after the Woman's Legal Centre (WLC) along with the Legal Resource Centre (LRC) challenged the City's housing allocation policy known as "Housing Schemes Constructed by a Local Authority".

They said they believed the policy was inconsistent with the Constitution. 

The parties took issue with the policy that stipulates where the City allocated a housing opportunity to a male beneficiary, the City must immediately amend its housing allocation records to reflect parties, who were married at the time of the housing opportunity, were regarded as equal beneficiaries.  

In terms of the policy, the sale agreement had to reflect that both parties, who were married at the time of the housing opportunity, had equal shares.

The case comes after Gadijah Abdullah approached the LRC on the basis that she felt discriminated against because of her gender.

Abdullah's husband entered into a sale agreement with the City and in return the property was available for transfer in terms of the housing allocation policy.

When Abdullah applied for a housing subsidy, she was informed the criteria stipulated had to be, a married male man, a single person with dependents residing permanently with the applicant and a married female who is also the breadwinner of the family.

After Abdullah divorced her husband, she approached the City again to inquire about transferring the sale of the property to her name but needed consent. 

In court papers, the LRC argued the housing allocation policy unfairly discriminated against women in that a woman qualified to buy or rent from the City only if she had dependents living with her and was married. 

"Whereas men were entitled to buy and rent if they were married. Men were not required to be breadwinners in order to acquire ownership of a home," the court papers said. 

The WLC said it joined the case in the public interest on behalf of women in similar situations such as Abdullah.  

It added women could not get housing because they were not recognised as breadwinners as they were woman - they could only be dependent on their husbands.

The implication therefore was women were discriminated against because of their gender and missed out on equal rights recognition in terms of housing allocated to their husbands alone.

The court granted an order for the City to launch a media campaign to explain what needed to be done, identify affected women, adding affected women to the rental purchase agreements and ensuring that once ownership was due, it was transferred to both parties (man and woman). 

They will be back in court in February next year to consider what has been done.

The City's legal team said it was seeking an order that all the delayed sale contracts, where the wife was not originally included as a co-purchaser, were amended by the court to ensure wives are co-purchasers. 

"Notice of this proposed amendment is to be given to all beneficiaries in the communication campaign which the City will undertake.

"This will be an effective use of the City's resources. The point made which you refer to is that the City lacks the resources to identify such women and the court-ordered amendment to the contract which is sought by the City is a mechanism which would grant effective relief," advocate Michelle O'Sullivan added.