CaseNotes LogoCaseNotes
  • Home
  • Library
  • Research
  • Discussion Hub
  • Wiki
  • Latin Dictionary
  • Question Bank
  • Settings
S

Student

Student Account

South African Law • Jurisdictional Corpus
HomeLibraryResearchQuestionsSettings
Judicial Precedent
Ask AI

Clivia Gardens Body Corporate v Tsobole Vusi Jean

CitationCSOS 6543/GP/23
JurisdictionZA
Area of Law
Community Schemes Ombud Service Act No.9 of 2011
Free account

Get the most out of this judgment

Create a free CaseNotes account to save this case, see how it's cited, get an AI summary, and search 10,000+ SA judgments.

Create free accountor sign in

Facts of the Case

The applicant, Clivia Gardens Body Corporate, is a sectional title development seeking payment of outstanding levies from the respondent, Tsobole Vusi Jean, who owns unit D52 in the scheme. The respondent has failed to make regular payments and has not responded to requests for payment.

Legal Issues

  • Whether the respondent should be ordered to pay outstanding levies
  • The application of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act No.9 of 2011

Judicial Outcome

The applicant, Clivia Gardens Body Corporate, has been granted an order for the payment of R8427.12 (eight thousand, four hundred and twenty-seven rand and 12 cent) in outstanding levies by the respondent, Tsobole Vusi Jean.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the body corporate is entitled to recover levies from unit owners as per section 3(2) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 and Management Rule 21(3)(c). The non-payment can destabilize a scheme, affecting all members' collective interests.

Obiter Dicta

The court noted that a member cannot withhold levies on grounds of disputing the necessity or financial wisdom of such levies. It also stated that parties are generally expected to cover their own costs in disputes determined under section 54 of the CSOS Act.

Legal Significance

This case establishes that community schemes have the authority to recover levies from unit owners through the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act No.9 of 2011, even if the owner disputes the necessity or financial wisdom of such levies.

Practice This Case

Sign up to practise IRAC analysis, issue spotting, and argument building on this case.

Explore More Cases

More Community Schemes Ombud Service Act No.9 of 2011 cases

  • Crescendo Body Corporate v Mabio Potego BenedictCSOS 5781/GP/23
  • Growth Invest 133 (PTY)LTD v AM Mnakathi and Lala Palm Body CorporateCSOS 4441/KZN/23
  • Route 82 Homeowners' Association v T WashomaCSOS 2715/GP/23

More South Africa cases

  • 3M South Africa (Pty) Ltd v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service(272/09) [2010] ZASCA 20 (23 March 2010)
  • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (04 February 2026)
  • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Nicholas Ngwanammoto Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (4 February 2026)
  • 4-Tune Investments (Pty) Ltd v Kingsgate Body CorporateCSOS 4565/WC/22 (Adjudication Order, 29 November 2023)
  • 68 Wolmarans Street Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tufh Limited(1263/2022) [2024] ZASCA 48 (15 April 2024)
  • 9 on Rydal Vale Court Body Corporate v Pan African Holdings Pty LtdCSOS-4563/KZN/23 (Adjudication Order, 8 November 2023)
  • AAA Investments (Proprietary) Limited v The Micro Finance Regulatory Council and Another2006 (11) BCLR 1255 (CC) (also reported as CCT 51/05)
  • A A Alloy Foundry (Pty) Limited v Titaco Projects (Pty) LimitedCase No. 309/97