Lisbon Body Corporate v T Mahlewu

The applicant, Lisbon Body Corporate, a sectional title body corporate for a residential scheme in Benoni, Gauteng, brought an application under the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) against the respondent, T Mahlewu, the registered owner of unit 16 in the scheme. The dispute concerned unpaid levy contributions allegedly owed by the respondent. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed over a period of time to make regular levy payments and that, despite requests and the exhaustion of internal remedies, the arrears remained unpaid. The amount claimed was R19 783.82 as reflected on the October 2023 statement. The matter was first processed through the CSOS dispute-resolution framework; after conciliation failed, a certificate of non-resolution was issued on 4 December 2023 and the matter was referred for adjudication. The respondent did not file a substantive response disputing the claim.

• Whether the CSOS had jurisdiction under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act to determine a dispute concerning unpaid levy contributions.
• Whether the applicant body corporate had established, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent owed arrear levy contributions in the amount of R19 783.82.
• Whether the respondent's failure to respond or dispute the claim justified granting the relief sought on the papers.
• Whether a costs order should be made in the circumstances.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R19 783.82 in full on or before 30 April 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate may obtain relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of arrear levies where it places sufficient evidence before the adjudicator showing that levy contributions were due and unpaid, and the claim is established on a balance of probabilities. In a sectional title scheme, levies properly raised pursuant to the body corporate's statutory powers are recoverable from the registered owner of the unit, and an owner's failure to respond or raise a substantive defence permits the adjudicator to grant the payment order sought.

The adjudicator observed that levies are the 'lifeblood' of shared living schemes and that non-payment can destabilise a scheme and prejudice all owners by undermining maintenance, insurance, security and related communal obligations. The adjudicator also noted, for completeness, that a member cannot withhold levies simply because the member disputes the necessity or financial wisdom of the decision to impose them, and referred to Management Rule 21(3)(c) regarding the charging of interest on overdue amounts.

The decision illustrates the CSOS's role as a statutory forum for the efficient recovery of sectional title levy arrears. It reinforces the principle that body corporates may recover properly raised levies through CSOS adjudication and that non-payment threatens the functioning of community schemes. It also confirms that, where an owner fails to dispute a properly supported levy claim, the adjudicator may grant relief on the papers. The order is significant at a practical level for community schemes, though it is not a superior court precedent.