Gayle Saxe v Pleasant Ways Body Corporate and Trustees of Pleasant Ways Body Corporate

The applicant, Gayle Saxe, is the registered owner of units 309, 310 and 406 in the Pleasant Ways sectional title scheme in Sea Point, Cape Town. She brought an application to the Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS) under section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011. Her complaints originally included: (a) a surcharge of R502 per month imposed from January 2022 on owners who had increased occupancy through reconfiguration of bedrooms or sleeping areas; (b) a R500 spot fine; and (c) refusal by the body corporate to provide the names and email addresses of all owners in the scheme. During the hearing, the respondent conceded that the surcharge and associated interest would be reversed, and that the spot fine had already been reversed. The only live dispute requiring determination was the applicant's request for the names and email addresses of all members. She sought the information in order to engage members before a proposed special general meeting concerning restrictions on short-term letting, an activity in which she participated. The respondent resisted disclosure on the basis that some owners had instructed that their details not be shared and that disclosure was not reasonable or in the body corporate's interests.

• Whether the surcharge levied against the applicant was incorrectly determined or unreasonable under section 39(1)(c) of the CSOS Act.
• Whether the body corporate had wrongfully denied the applicant access to information, namely the names and email addresses of all members, under section 39(7)(a) of the CSOS Act.
• How the duty under section 3(1)(n) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act and PMR 27 to provide member information interacts with the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPIA).
• Whether the applicant's intended use of the membership information to communicate ahead of a special general meeting constituted a legitimate and reasonable purpose.

The application was granted. The second respondent was ordered to reverse all surcharges and related interest levied against the applicant from January 2022 by 8 March 2024. The respondent was further ordered to provide the applicant with the names and email addresses of all members of the scheme by 8 March 2024, provided the applicant assured the second respondent that the information would be safeguarded and destroyed once its legitimate purpose had been fulfilled. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate must comply with a reasonable request by a member for the names and addresses/contact details of members where the request is made for a legitimate purpose connected to the administration and governance of the scheme. The disclosure of such information, although constituting personal information, is permissible when the STSMA and PMR 27 are read with section 11(1)(f) of POPIA, and prior consent from members is not required in those circumstances. Additionally, where a levy or surcharge is conceded to have been improperly imposed, CSOS may order its reversal together with related interest under section 39(1)(c) of the CSOS Act.

The adjudicator observed that the appointed information officer of a body corporate has a discretion to assess the legitimacy of requests for personal information by considering the reasonableness and purpose of the request. The adjudicator also commented generally on costs in CSOS matters, noting that parties are usually expected to bear their own costs and that adverse cost orders are more common in dismissals under section 53 for frivolous, vexatious or non-compliant applications. These remarks were ancillary to the determination of the actual relief granted.

The decision is significant in community schemes law because it confirms that a body corporate's statutory duty to provide member information under the STSMA and the Prescribed Management Regulations can, in appropriate circumstances, override objections based purely on privacy concerns, provided the request is reasonable and for a legitimate purpose consistent with POPIA. It also illustrates the CSOS's power to grant practical relief concerning unreasonable levies and access to scheme information, reinforcing transparency and member participation in sectional title governance.