The Trustees of The Madison at Amberfield City Body Corporate v EN Sibambo and PN Masonto

The applicant is the body corporate of The Madison at Amberfield City, a sectional title scheme, represented by its managing agent, CSI Property Solutions, acting under a trustees' mandate. The respondents are the owners of Unit 9 in the scheme. The body corporate alleged that the respondents had failed to pay levies and related charges due to the scheme. It brought an application to the Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS) under section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011, seeking relief under section 39(1)(e) for payment of outstanding contributions. The respondents did not file any submissions. The Ombud referred the matter directly to adjudication after the respondents failed to respond. The applicant placed before the adjudicator a statement of account and trustees' resolutions supporting the levies, interest and costs claimed. The outstanding balance as at 9 June 2023 was R9 124.43.

• Whether the applicant, through its managing agent, had authority to institute the proceedings on behalf of the body corporate.
• Whether the respondents, as owners in the sectional title scheme, were liable under the STSMA and management rules to pay outstanding levies and related amounts to the body corporate.
• Whether the amount of R9 124.43, including interest and costs, had been proved on a balance of probabilities.
• Whether relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act should be granted.

The application for relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act was granted. The respondents were ordered to pay R9 124.43 in three equal monthly instalments of R3 041.48 with effect from 29 December 2023. If any instalment is not paid, the full outstanding balance becomes immediately due and payable. The order takes effect immediately upon electronic service. Each party was ordered to pay its own costs.

A body corporate is entitled, under sections 3(1)(c) and 3(2) of the STSMA, to recover unpaid levies from owners through CSOS proceedings, and relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act may be granted where the body corporate proves, on a balance of probabilities, the owner's indebtedness by admissible documentary evidence such as a statement of account and trustees' resolutions. A managing agent may institute such proceedings where its authority is established by mandate from the trustees.

The adjudicator set out general observations on the evaluation of evidence, including that only relevant evidence should be considered and that proof is determined on a balance of probabilities with reference to credibility and probabilities. The order also recorded the statutory right of appeal under section 57 of the CSOS Act, but these remarks were not essential to the determination of liability.

The matter illustrates the CSOS enforcement mechanism for recovery of arrear levies by a sectional title body corporate. It confirms that a body corporate may recover unpaid contributions through CSOS proceedings under the STSMA and CSOS Act, and that a managing agent may validly institute proceedings if properly authorised by the trustees. It also demonstrates that, in the absence of opposition, a properly supported statement of account and trustee resolutions can suffice to prove levy indebtedness on a balance of probabilities.