Trustees of Coniston Mews Body Corporate v Tamar Elenor Leah Lloyd

The applicant, the Trustees of Coniston Mews 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, Tamar Elenor Leah Lloyd, the registered owner of a unit in the scheme. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed to pay monthly levies, causing prejudice to the scheme’s finances. The applicant relied on a levy statement showing arrears of R13 719,10 calculated up to 31 August 2023, inclusive of interest. Interest had been approved in a trustees’ resolution passed on 12 June 2023 in terms of Management Rule 21(3)(c). The respondent did not file any response despite being invited to do so. A certificate of non-resolution was issued and the matter proceeded to adjudication on the papers.

• Whether the CSOS adjudicator had jurisdiction under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act to order payment of outstanding levies and interest.
• Whether the respondent, as owner of a unit in the sectional title scheme, was liable to pay the body corporate the outstanding levies reflected in the applicant’s statement of account.
• Whether the body corporate was entitled to charge interest on overdue levies pursuant to the trustees’ resolution and Prescribed Management Rule 21(3)(c).
• What payment order should be made in light of the uncontested evidence.

The application succeeded. The respondent was ordered to pay the applicant R13 719,10, inclusive of interest, in 5 equal instalments of R2 743,82 commencing on 1 October 2023 and ending on 1 February 2024. If the respondent defaulted, the full outstanding amount would immediately become due and payable. No order as to costs was made.

An owner in a sectional title scheme is obliged to pay levies lawfully raised by the body corporate under section 3 of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act. Under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act, an adjudicator may order payment of outstanding levies and authorised interest where the body corporate proves the indebtedness on a balance of probabilities. Where a valid trustees’ resolution and Prescribed Management Rule 21(3)(c) authorise interest on overdue amounts, such interest is recoverable together with the arrear levies.

The adjudicator’s references to the effect of COVID-19 on paper-based adjudication and to the general right of appeal under section 57 of the CSOS Act were procedural and not necessary to the determination of liability. The discussion of the general contractual nature of scheme rules, drawing from Mount Edgecombe, was supportive context rather than strictly necessary to the order in this uncontested levy-recovery matter.

The decision affirms the CSOS’s role as an accessible forum for body corporates to recover unpaid levies from owners in community schemes. It reinforces that levy obligations in sectional title schemes are enforceable through section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act, and that interest on arrears may be recovered where authorised by a valid trustee resolution and the prescribed management rules. The case also illustrates that, in the absence of opposition, properly supported documentary evidence may suffice to obtain a payment order.