The Trustees of The Meadows Body Corporate v KP Diyane

The applicant, the Trustees of The Meadows Body Corporate, brought a dispute-resolution application under section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) against the respondent, KP Diyane, the registered owner of Unit 1 in the scheme situated at The Meadows Body Corporate, Ruimsig Country Estate, Krugersdorp, Gauteng. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had fallen into arrears with levies and ancillary charges, including monthly CSOS levies, and was indebted in the amount of R28 963.98 as reflected in an updated levy statement dated 6 March 2024. The applicant stated that internal remedies had been exhausted and that final letters of demand had been sent. The respondent did not reply to correspondence from the CSOS, filed no submissions, and did not contest the applicant's documentary case. The Ombud issued a certificate of non-resolution and referred the matter to adjudication, which was conducted on the papers on 25 March 2024.

• Whether the CSOS adjudicator had jurisdiction under sections 38 and 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act to order payment of arrear levies and ancillary amounts due to a body corporate.
• Whether the applicant proved on a balance of probabilities that the respondent was indebted to the body corporate in the amount of R28 963.98.
• Whether the levies and ancillary charges appearing on the levy statement were lawfully raised in accordance with the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 and the Prescribed Management Rules.
• What payment terms should be ordered in relation to the proven arrears, including whether interest should accrue and whether instalments should be permitted.

The application was granted. The respondent was declared indebted to the applicant in the amount of R28 963.98 for arrear levies and ancillary amounts in respect of Unit 1. The respondent was ordered to pay this amount in 12 equal monthly instalments of R2 413.67, commencing on 1 April 2024, with the remaining 11 instalments payable on the first day of each succeeding month. No interest was to accrue on the outstanding levy under the order. The order did not affect the respondent's obligation to continue paying regular monthly levies and ancillary charges. If the respondent defaulted on any instalment, the full outstanding amount would become immediately due and payable. There was no order as to costs.

A body corporate is entitled, under sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act and section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act, to recover arrear levies and authorised ancillary charges from a unit owner through CSOS adjudication where it proves, on a balance of probabilities, that the amounts were lawfully levied in accordance with the Prescribed Management Rules and supporting resolutions. In the absence of a rebutting version from the owner, an uncontested levy statement and supporting documentation may suffice to establish the debt. A CSOS adjudicator may then make an order for payment and regulate the manner of payment, including instalments.

The adjudicator observed that owners who default on levy payments are effectively subsidised by compliant members of the body corporate and that a body corporate cannot perform its statutory functions and duties without contributions from unit owners. These remarks explain the practical importance of levy enforcement but were not strictly necessary to the dispositive finding that the debt had been proved and was recoverable.

The matter is significant as a practical illustration of the CSOS's levy-recovery jurisdiction under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act. It confirms that a body corporate may obtain enforceable relief through CSOS for unpaid levies and related charges on the basis of documentary proof, particularly where an owner does not contest the claim. The order also reflects the adjudicator's remedial flexibility in structuring repayment by instalments while preserving the body corporate's right to ongoing levies. The case reinforces the statutory duty of sectional title owners to contribute to the financial obligations of the scheme and the centrality of trustee resolutions and compliant levy statements in proving debt.