Marula Lofts Body Corporate v KS Bonga

The applicant, Marula Lofts Body Corporate, is the body corporate of a residential sectional title scheme situated in South Hills, Johannesburg, Gauteng. The respondent, KS Bonga, is the registered owner of unit 81 in the scheme and therefore a member of the body corporate. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed over a period of time to pay levy contributions due in respect of the unit. As at the date of the application, supported by the September 2023 statement, the arrears totalled R16 455.21, inclusive of interest calculated at 24% per annum. The applicant stated that requests for payment had been made, internal remedies had been exhausted, and the trustees had resolved to proceed through the Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS). The respondent failed to file a response to the dispute despite being notified and given an opportunity to do so. A certificate of non-resolution was issued on 29 November 2023 after conciliation failed, and the matter proceeded to adjudication on the papers.

• Whether the CSOS had jurisdiction under sections 38 and 39(1)(e) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 to determine the dispute and grant relief for unpaid levy contributions.
• Whether the applicant body corporate had established, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent was liable for arrear levy contributions in the amount of R16 455.21.
• Whether the body corporate was entitled to recover interest on overdue levies in terms of the applicable management rules and statutory framework.
• Whether any costs order should be made in the adjudication.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R16 455.21 to the applicant in full on or before 30 April 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate is entitled under the CSOS Act and the STSMA to seek and obtain an adjudication order for payment of arrear levy contributions where it proves, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent owner owes duly raised levies. In the absence of any answering evidence from the owner, a properly supported levy statement and proof of the basis for the levies may suffice to justify an order under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act. Interest on overdue amounts may be charged where authorised by the applicable management rule and trustee resolution.

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, insurance, security and other common expenses. The adjudicator also remarked, for completeness, that members cannot withhold levies merely because they dispute the necessity or financial wisdom of the decision to impose them. These comments provided context and policy justification for enforcing levy obligations, beyond what was strictly necessary to decide the uncontested claim.

The matter illustrates the CSOS's role as a statutory forum for the recovery of arrear levies in sectional title and other community schemes. It reaffirms the principle that body corporates may recover duly raised contributions from owners through CSOS adjudication and that failure by an owner to respond to the claim may result in relief being granted on the applicant's uncontested evidence. The order also underscores the importance in South African community schemes law of regular levy payment to maintain the financial viability of the scheme.