Monte Carlo Body Corporate v MM Biyela

The applicant, Monte Carlo Body Corporate, a registered sectional title scheme situated in Bellair, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, brought an application under section 38 read with section 39(1)(e) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) against the respondent, MM Biyela, the registered owner of a unit in the scheme. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed to pay levy contributions due to the scheme. It claimed arrear levies in the amount of R42 743.93, inclusive of interest charged at 2% per month. The applicant stated that requests for payment had been made, internal remedies had been exhausted, and the trustees had resolved to pursue recovery through CSOS. A contribution statement/breakdown was submitted in support of the claim. The respondent did not respond to the application or to the section 43 notice, and after conciliation failed, a certificate of non-resolution dated 8 May 2023 was issued and the matter was referred for adjudication on the papers.

• Whether the CSOS had jurisdiction under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act to grant relief requiring payment of levy contributions.
• Whether the applicant body corporate had established, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent owed arrear levy contributions in the amount claimed.
• Whether the body corporate was entitled to charge interest on overdue amounts.
• Whether any costs order should be made in the adjudication proceedings.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R42 743.93 to the applicant in full on or before 31 March 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate in a sectional title scheme may obtain relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of arrear levy contributions where it provides sufficient proof, on a balance of probabilities, of the levies due and payable by the owner. Levy obligations are enforceable as part of the statutory administration of the scheme, and overdue amounts may attract interest where authorised by the applicable rules or trustee resolution. A respondent's failure to answer the claim does not prevent an adjudicator from granting relief where the applicant's evidence is sufficient.

The adjudicator remarked generally that non-payment of levies can seriously destabilise a scheme and that levies are the lifeblood of shared living schemes because they fund maintenance, repairs, insurance and security. The adjudicator also made general observations on costs in CSOS proceedings, noting that parties usually bear their own costs unless section 53 applies. The official law report citation for The Body Corporate of Fish Eagle v Group Twelve Investments (Pty) Ltd was not provided in the judgment text, so it cannot be stated more precisely.

The decision reinforces the principle in South African community schemes law that body corporates are entitled to recover properly raised levy contributions through the CSOS mechanism and that owners cannot simply ignore levy obligations. It also illustrates the practical use of section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act as a cost-effective statutory remedy for levy recovery, especially where a respondent defaults in participating in the process.