The Trustees of Palm Court Body Corporate v SS Mamo and NB Mamo

The applicant, the Trustees of Palm Court Body Corporate, brought a dispute-resolution application under section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 seeking relief under section 39(1)(e) for payment of arrear levies and ancillary charges. The first and second respondents, SS Mamo and NB Mamo, are the registered co-owners of section 8 in the Palm Court scheme in Haddon, Johannesburg. According to the applicant, the respondents fell into arrears from December 2022 and, despite written demands, failed or neglected to pay monthly levies and ancillary charges, including CSOS levies. The applicant submitted a statement of account and supporting resolution authorising the charges. The matter could not be resolved through conciliation, a certificate of non-resolution was issued, and the dispute was referred to adjudication. The respondents filed no submissions. The applicant claimed that as at 13 March 2024 the amount owing was R7 905.43.

• Whether the respondents, as co-owners in a sectional title scheme, were liable to the body corporate for arrear levies and ancillary charges.
• Whether the applicant proved, on a balance of probabilities, the indebtedness of the respondents in the amount claimed.
• Whether an order should be granted under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of contributions or other amounts due to the body corporate.
• Whether costs or interest should be awarded in relation to the arrear levy claim.

The application succeeded. The respondents were declared indebted to the applicant in the amount of R7 905.43 in respect of levies and ancillary charges for section 8 as at 13 March 2024. They were ordered, jointly and severally in effect ('the one paying the other to be absolved'), to pay that amount in six equal monthly instalments of R1 976.36 commencing on 1 April 2024, with the remaining five instalments due on the first day of each succeeding month. The order did not affect the respondents' ongoing obligation to pay regular monthly levies and ancillary charges. No interest would accrue on the outstanding amount during the six-month payment period. If the respondents defaulted on any instalment, the full amount would become immediately due and payable. There was no order as to costs.

A body corporate in a sectional title scheme is entitled, under the STSMA and the CSOS Act, to recover duly levied contributions and ancillary charges from unit owners where it proves the indebtedness on a balance of probabilities. Once the body corporate has provided the levy statement and the requisite authority for the charges, and absent any rebutting evidence from the owners, an adjudicator may grant relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of arrear levies. Owners' contribution obligations are integral to the body corporate's ability to perform its statutory functions.

The adjudicator remarked that owners who default on levy payments are effectively subsidised by other members who pay conscientiously and that a body corporate cannot perform its functions and duties in the absence of funds from owners. These observations explain the policy importance of levy enforcement but were not strictly necessary to the dispositive finding of indebtedness. The adjudicator also adopted a lenient approach by suspending interest during the six-month instalment period, which was a discretionary remedial feature rather than a statement of binding principle.

This adjudication illustrates the CSOS's role as a statutory forum for efficient recovery of unpaid body corporate levies in sectional title schemes. It reinforces that owners are obliged to contribute to the financial administration of the scheme and that a body corporate may obtain an enforceable order under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act where arrears are proved on the papers. The decision also reflects a pragmatic remedial approach by allowing payment by instalments while preserving the body corporate's right to immediate payment upon default. It is relevant to South African community schemes jurisprudence because it affirms the centrality of levy collection to the proper functioning of sectional title bodies corporate.