Trustees of Sportsview Body Corporate v M. Le Roux

The applicant, the Trustees of Sportsview Body Corporate, is a community scheme/body corporate under the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011. The respondent, M. Le Roux, is the owner of Unit 5 in Sportsview Body Corporate, Krugersdorp. The body corporate alleged that the respondent had failed to pay monthly levies due under the sectional title scheme’s rules. It submitted a levy statement reflecting arrears of R1 668,03 as at 1 November 2023. The applicant relied on Rule 21 of the scheme’s conduct rules, which required monthly payment of levies and provided for consequences of late payment. The respondent was invited to file written submissions but failed to respond by the deadline and gave no explanation for that failure. After a certificate of non-resolution had been issued, the matter proceeded to adjudication on the papers.

• Whether the CSOS adjudicator had jurisdiction under section 39(1)(e) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 to order payment of outstanding levies.
• Whether the applicant established on a balance of probabilities that the respondent owed arrear levies in the amount of R1 668,03.
• Whether, in the absence of any response from the respondent, the body corporate was entitled to an order compelling payment of the arrears and interest/outstanding amount claimed.

The application succeeded. The adjudicator ordered the respondent to pay the applicant outstanding levies of R1 668,03 in two equal instalments of R834,01, the first due on 1 December 2023 and the final instalment due on 1 January 2024. If the respondent failed to make payment, the full amount would immediately become due and payable. No order as to costs was made.

A body corporate is entitled, under section 39(1)(e) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011, to obtain an adjudication order compelling an owner to pay arrear levies where the scheme rules and supporting account statements establish the indebtedness on a balance of probabilities. Owners in a sectional title or community scheme are bound by the scheme’s rules and are obliged to pay contributions lawfully levied under the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011.

The adjudicator’s references to the general standard of evaluating evidence, the contractual nature of community scheme rules as discussed in Mount Edgecombe Country Club Estate Management Association Two (RF) NPC v Singh and Others, and the general observation that members are expected to comply with levy impositions because they joined the scheme voluntarily, were supportive observations rather than strictly necessary beyond the finding that the arrears were proved and payable. The discussion of the right of appeal under section 57 of the CSOS Act was also not part of the ratio.

This decision illustrates the CSOS adjudication process for recovery of arrear levies in community schemes and confirms that a body corporate may obtain payment relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act on documentary proof of indebtedness. It reinforces the principle that owners in sectional title/community schemes are bound by the scheme’s conduct rules and levy obligations, and that non-opposition may leave the applicant’s evidence uncontested and sufficient on a balance of probabilities. Although an adjudication order rather than a superior court precedent, it is practically important for levy enforcement in sectional title governance.