Michelle Kruger obo Hubert Place Body Corporate v O Nhlapo

Michelle Kruger of Van Aswegen Estates, acting as the authorised managing agent on behalf of Hubert Place Body Corporate, brought an application under the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) against O Nhlapo, the owner of Unit 21 in the Hubert Place sectional title scheme in Witpoortjie, Roodepoort, Gauteng. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed to pay levies from December 2020 and that arrear levy contributions, inclusive of interest, amounted to R15 066.02. The applicant submitted a contribution statement and indicated that internal remedies had been exhausted and that the trustees had resolved to pursue recovery through CSOS. The respondent did not respond to the application, did not answer the section 43 notice issued on 28 September 2023, and did not file submissions by the required date. A certificate of non-resolution was issued on 31 October 2023, after which the matter proceeded to adjudication on the papers.

• Whether the CSOS had jurisdiction under sections 38 and 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act to determine the dispute.
• Whether Hubert Place Body Corporate, acting through its managing agent, was entitled to seek an order for payment of arrear levy contributions from the respondent owner.
• Whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence, on a balance of probabilities, to justify an order for payment of R15 066.02 in arrear levies and interest.
• Whether any costs order should be made in the adjudication.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R15 066.02 in full on or before 31 March 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate in a sectional title scheme is entitled, under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act read with its statutory powers and duties under the STSMA, to obtain an adjudication order compelling an owner to pay arrear levy contributions where the body corporate provides sufficient documentary proof of the levies raised and the outstanding amount. An owner may not withhold payment of levies on the basis of disagreement with the decision to impose them.

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 related communal expenses. The adjudicator also made general remarks that costs orders are not usually granted in section 54 CSOS adjudications and are more common in dismissals under section 53.

This adjudication affirms the power of a body corporate to recover arrear levy contributions through the CSOS dispute-resolution mechanism under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act. It reinforces the importance of levy collection to the viability of sectional title schemes and illustrates that, where an owner fails to oppose the claim and the body corporate provides adequate documentary proof, CSOS will grant payment orders. The decision is also significant for confirming that disputes about the wisdom or necessity of levies do not justify withholding payment.