David Phahlamohlaka obo Royal Reef West Body Corporate v SS Mohamed

Royal Reef West Body Corporate, a residential sectional title scheme in Boksburg, acting through its authorised representative David Phahlamohlaka, brought a CSOS application against SS Mohamed, the registered owner of section 224 in the scheme. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed over time to pay levy contributions due in respect of his unit. As at 14 August 2023, supported by the August 2023 statement, the arrear amount was R16 489.85, stated to be inclusive of interest. The applicant said requests for payment had been made, internal remedies were exhausted, and the trustees resolved to proceed through CSOS. The matter was referred to conciliation, a certificate of non-resolution was issued on 13 September 2023, and the dispute proceeded to adjudication. The respondent did not file a response to the allegations despite being given notice and an opportunity to do so.

• Whether CSOS had jurisdiction under section 39 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 to determine the levy dispute.
• Whether the applicant body corporate was entitled to an order under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act compelling payment of arrear levy contributions by the respondent owner.
• Whether the evidence placed before the adjudicator established, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent owed R16 489.85 in arrear levies.
• Whether any order as to costs should be made in the adjudication.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R16 489.85 to the applicant in full by 29 February 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate in a sectional title scheme is entitled, through CSOS and under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act, to obtain an order compelling a unit owner to pay arrear levy contributions where the body corporate places sufficient evidence before the adjudicator showing that the levies were lawfully raised and remain unpaid. Levy obligations are not suspended merely because an owner may dispute the desirability or wisdom of the levy decision, and such arrears may be determined on a balance of probabilities on the written record.

The adjudicator observed that non-payment of levies can seriously destabilise a scheme and that levies are the 'lifeblood' of shared living schemes because they fund maintenance, repair, insurance, security and related collective expenses. The adjudicator also noted, for completeness, that Management Rule 21(3)(c) permits the charging of interest on overdue amounts pursuant to a written trustee resolution, although additional interest was not sought in this case. The discussion of the general approach to costs under sections 53 and 54 of the CSOS Act was likewise ancillary to the main determination.

This decision reinforces the enforceability of levy obligations in sectional title and community schemes through the CSOS dispute-resolution mechanism. It underscores that levy contributions are fundamental to the viability of community schemes and that a body corporate may obtain a payment order under section 39(1)(e) where arrears are established on the papers. The matter also illustrates that, where a respondent fails to answer the claim, CSOS may grant relief based on sufficient documentary proof. In South African community schemes practice, it affirms the principle that owners cannot simply withhold levies and that CSOS provides an accessible statutory remedy for recovery.