Trustees of Monte Carlo Body Corporate v G P Khanyile

The applicant, the Trustees of Monte Carlo Body Corporate, acting through its managing agents, brought a dispute-resolution application to the Community Schemes Ombud Service in terms of section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011. The respondent, G P Khanyile, is the registered owner of Unit 39 in the Monte Carlo sectional title scheme in Bellair, Durban South. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed to pay levy contributions and related charges, and sought an order under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act compelling payment of R115 580.46 as reflected on a statement dated 1 November 2022. The applicant stated that owners had been given opportunities to enter payment arrangements and that a final 14-day notice had been sent on 5 July 2022. It also asserted that widespread non-payment by owners had left the scheme without insurance and unable to maintain the common property. The respondent filed no written submissions. During adjudication, the adjudicator requested further information from the applicant, including detailed statements, historical account information, proof of steps taken to contact the respondent, and a trustees' resolution authorising the charging of interest. The applicant did not provide the requested documents.

• Whether the applicant had proved on a balance of probabilities that the respondent was liable for arrear levies and charges in the amount of R115 580.46.
• Whether interest debited to the respondent's levy account was authorised as required by Prescribed Management Rule 21(3)(c).
• Whether the applicant had provided sufficient documentary proof to justify an order under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act.
• Whether uncertainty regarding the composition of the debt, including possible prescription or application of the in duplum rule, prevented the granting of the relief sought.

The application was refused. The adjudicator made no order as to costs. The formal order was that the relief sought by the applicant in respect of arrear levy contributions under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act is refused.

A body corporate applying under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of arrear levies must prove the debt with sufficient supporting documentation, including proper account statements and proof that any interest charged was validly authorised in terms of Prescribed Management Rule 21(3)(c). Where the applicant fails to provide requested records and the amount claimed cannot be verified, an adjudicator cannot grant a payment order, even if the respondent files no opposition.

The adjudicator made broader observations that sectional owners are obliged to contribute to the body corporate's funds, that non-paying owners are effectively subsidised by compliant owners, and that levy defaults can seriously impair a scheme's ability to insure, maintain, and manage common property. The adjudicator also remarked on concern about the scale of the arrears and the apparent failure of the trustees to act earlier, but these comments were ancillary to the core finding that the claim was not adequately proved.

This decision is significant in community schemes and sectional title practice because it confirms that, although owners are generally obliged to pay levies, a body corporate seeking a CSOS payment order must still prove the debt properly and comply with statutory and rule-based requirements. In particular, interest on overdue levies must be supported by a valid written trustees' resolution, and the body corporate must provide sufficient accounting records to show how the claimed amount was calculated. The case illustrates that CSOS adjudicators will not grant levy-recovery orders merely because the respondent defaults in the proceedings; the applicant must establish its claim with adequate evidence.