Sable Hills Waterfront Estate CC v Sable Hills Waterfront Estate Home Owners’ Association NPC

The appellant, Sable Hills Waterfront Estate CC, was the developer of a residential township known as Sable Hills. The respondent was the home owners’ association (HOA) established to manage the estate. In terms of the HOA’s articles of association, members were obliged to pay levies apportioned equally between the owners of ‘stands and units’ in the estate. During 2012, the HOA levied an amount of R1 750 per stand. While some erven and a sectional title unit had been transferred to third parties, the developer retained ownership of the remainder of the land, which had been laid out into multiple erven on the approved general plan but consolidated in title. The developer contended that it was either not liable for levies at all, or alternatively liable for only one levy in respect of the consolidated remainder. The HOA contended that the developer was liable to pay a separate levy for each stand shown on the general plan. The dispute was presented to the High Court as a special case, and the developer appealed against the finding that it was liable for multiple levies.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the High Court’s decision that the developer was liable to pay levies in respect of each stand shown on the general plan was upheld.

The case clarifies the interpretation of levy provisions in home owners’ association constitutions, particularly in large township developments where land remains consolidated in the developer’s name. It affirms a contextual and purposive approach to interpreting HOA articles and confirms that levy liability may be based on township planning arrangements rather than formal registration in the Deeds Registry.