Trustees of Oaklands Place Body Corporate v Arthee Naidoo

The applicant, the Trustees of Oaklands Place Body Corporate, acting through its executive managing agent ZdMgt (Pty) Ltd, brought a dispute-resolution application under section 38 of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) against the respondent, Arthee Naidoo, the registered owner of unit F408 at Oaklands Place in Johannesburg. The respondent also owned multiple other units in the scheme and disputed electricity charges historically levied before the installation of prepaid meters. Meetings were held on 14 April 2023 and 12 June 2023 to resolve the dispute. The body corporate caused reconciliations to be done and maintained that the electricity readings and charges were correct. Although the applicant had at one stage offered to write off R22 560.44 relating to the broader dispute across 11 units, the respondent rejected that offer. In this application, the dispute concerned arrear levies and ancillary charges for unit F408. The respondent did not file a response to the section 43 notice and did not make final written submissions. The adjudicator requested an updated levy statement, but the parties did not respond to that request. On the evidence before the adjudicator, the arrears for unit F408 stood at R6 235.37 as at 1 August 2023.

• Whether the respondent, as owner of unit F408 in a sectional title scheme, was liable to pay the outstanding levies and ancillary charges claimed by the body corporate.
• Whether the applicant had proved on a balance of probabilities that the amount of R6 235.37 was due and payable as at 1 August 2023.
• Whether relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act should be granted for payment of a contribution or other amount.
• Whether the body corporate was entitled under the STSMA and prescribed management rules to recover overdue contributions and ancillary charges from a unit owner.
• Whether any basis existed on the papers for the respondent to withhold levy payments because of her dispute concerning electricity charges.

The application was granted. The adjudicator ordered that the respondent is indebted to the applicant in the amount of R6 235.37 in respect of levies and ancillary charges for unit F408 as at 1 August 2023. The respondent was ordered to pay this amount in four equal monthly instalments of R1 558.84, commencing on 1 March 2024, with the remaining instalments payable on the first day of each succeeding month. The order does not affect the respondent's obligation to continue paying regular monthly levies and ancillary charges. No interest would accrue during the instalment period, but 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 in a sectional title scheme is entitled, under the STSMA and the CSOS Act, to recover overdue levies and ancillary charges from a unit owner where it proves on a balance of probabilities that such amounts are due. An owner remains obliged to pay contributions necessary for the functioning of the scheme and cannot avoid that obligation merely by disputing related charges, absent proof displacing the body corporate's claim. Relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act is appropriate for ordering payment of such arrears.

The adjudicator observed 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 in the absence of contributions from owners. The adjudicator also noted the right of appeal under section 57 of the CSOS Act to the High Court on a question of law only. No substantial further obiter dicta were developed beyond these general observations.

This decision illustrates the CSOS's role in providing an accessible statutory mechanism for bodies corporate to recover arrear levies and ancillary charges from sectional title owners. It reinforces the principle that owners in community schemes cannot unilaterally withhold levy payments because they dispute aspects of their accounts, particularly where the body corporate has attempted reconciliation and the owner does not substantively oppose the claim. The matter also confirms the interrelationship between the CSOS Act and the STSMA in levy enforcement and shows that adjudicators may craft practical payment arrangements while still upholding the body corporate's entitlement to contributions essential for scheme administration.