The Trustees of Jacana Body Corporate v Sipho Mogashoa

The applicant, the Trustees of Jacana Body Corporate, brought an application under section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) against the respondent, Sipho Mogashoa, the owner of Unit 179 at Jacana in Kyalami, Midrand. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had fallen into arrears with his levy payments. It stated that monthly levy statements and reminder notices had been sent to him without success. The trustees had resolved, in terms of section 3(2) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 (STSMA), to mandate the managing agent to recover outstanding levies. The respondent did not file any response despite being notified under section 43 of the CSOS Act. The matter therefore proceeded on the papers before the adjudicator. The amount claimed was R13 455.69.

• Whether the CSOS adjudicator had grounds under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act to order payment of arrear levies by the respondent.
• Whether the applicant had established, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent owed the claimed levy arrears.
• Whether a unit owner's liability to pay levies arises from ownership, scheme rules, and the statutory functions and powers of the body corporate under the STSMA.
• Whether any basis existed to refuse relief where the respondent failed to file submissions or dispute the arrears claim.

The application in terms of section 39(1) of the CSOS Act was upheld. The respondent was ordered to pay the applicant R13 455.69 within 30 days of the order. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate is entitled, under the CSOS Act read with the STSMA and the scheme rules, to obtain an order for payment of arrear levies where it proves that a unit owner is liable for levies and has failed to pay them. Levy liability is an incident of ownership/membership in the scheme, and in the absence of any dispute or explanation from the owner, the body corporate's uncontested evidence may establish the debt on a balance of probabilities.

The adjudicator observed that non-payment of levies poses a serious risk to the financial viability of the scheme and may impair its ability to pay local authorities and service providers. He also noted the general principle that responsibility must be placed where it lies. These remarks support the decision but are broader explanatory comments rather than strictly necessary to the outcome.

The matter illustrates the enforcement of levy obligations in sectional title and community scheme governance through the CSOS adjudication process. It confirms that a body corporate may obtain relief for arrear levies on paper proceedings where proper notice was given and the owner fails to respond. The order reinforces the principle in South African scheme law that levy liability is tied to ownership and is central to the financial sustainability and administration of community schemes.