Swallow Square Body Corporate v IJ Koagile

The applicant, Swallow Square Body Corporate, a sectional title scheme situated in Randfontein, Gauteng, 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, IJ Koagile, the registered owner of unit 14 in the scheme. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed to pay levy contributions due to the scheme and that arrears in the amount of R8 576.12 were outstanding. The applicant submitted a contribution statement and supporting documentation, including reliance on trustee authority to raise levies and charge interest. Internal remedies were said to have been exhausted, and after conciliation failed, a certificate of non-resolution dated 30 October 2023 was issued and the matter was referred to adjudication. The respondent did not file any response despite notice in terms of section 43 of the CSOS Act and further opportunity to do so.

• Whether the CSOS had jurisdiction under the CSOS Act to determine the levy dispute between the body corporate and a unit owner.
• Whether the respondent, as owner and member of the scheme, was liable for payment of the arrear levy contributions claimed by the applicant.
• Whether the evidence submitted by the applicant was sufficient on a balance of probabilities to justify an order under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act.
• Whether any costs order should be made in the adjudication.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R8 576.12 to the applicant in full on or before 31 March 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate is entitled, under the CSOS Act read with the STSMA, to recover duly raised levy contributions from a unit owner through a CSOS adjudication where it provides sufficient documentary proof of the indebtedness and authority for the levies. An owner in a sectional title scheme is obliged to pay levies lawfully imposed by the body corporate, and absent a substantive defence, an adjudicator may grant an order for payment under section 39(1)(e).

The adjudicator observed that levies are the 'lifeblood' of shared living schemes and that non-payment can seriously destabilise a scheme by undermining maintenance, repair, insurance and security functions. The adjudicator also remarked generally that costs orders are more commonly associated with dismissals under section 53 of the CSOS Act rather than ordinary section 54 determinations, and that parties are generally expected to bear their own costs.

The matter illustrates the CSOS's role as a statutory forum for the recovery of arrear levies in sectional title schemes. It reinforces the principle that levy obligations are enforceable through CSOS adjudication and that the financial sustainability of community schemes depends on prompt payment by owners. It also reflects the established South African approach that owners cannot lawfully withhold levies because they dispute the propriety of the levy decision, and shows that uncontroverted documentary proof of arrears may suffice for relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act.