CSOS and the courts: where do I take my dispute?

Here’s a look at a recent case which dealt with a dispute between the body corporate and residents in a sectional title scheme.

Buying Property On Auction | Property Blog Articles

The dispute

The body corporate sought an urgent interdict against residents of a unit who had deliberately prevented and frustrated the body corporate from carrying out essential plumbing work next to a shared communal parking space. The estate was experiencing continuous burst water pipes, resulting in excessive water bills and the risk that the insurance company would repudiate their policies with the body corporate.

The court application

In the court application, the residents (the respondents) argued that the body corporate’s (the applicants) approach to seek relief at the High Court was premature. They further argued that the relief sought falls within the jurisdiction of the Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS). The court then had to decide whether the Body Corporate’s application was procedurally correct and could be heard by the High Court instead of the CSOS.

The court’s decision

The court held that the Body Corporate is a body corporate established under the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act (STSMA). In terms of section 3 of the Act, it is mandatory for a body corporate to be registered with the CSOS. As such, the Wingate Body Corporate is subject to the rules, regulations and procedures prescribed by the CSOS.

What is the function of the CSOS?

The CSOS regulates, monitors, and controls the quality of all sectional titles scheme governance documentation. It was established to provide an expeditious, informal and cost-effective mechanism for dispute resolution in community schemes, including urgent disputes.

A closer look at the judgement

Although a high court has concurrent jurisdiction to hear a matter properly brought before it, courts have adopted the view that not all matters brought before them ought to be entertained by the courts. There is, therefore, a preference for adjudication by specialised structures like the CSOS, which have been specifically created to resolve disputes of a particular nature effectively and expeditiously.

The courts held that the CSOS consists of suitably qualified adjudicators and, as such, a court is not only entitled to decline to entertain an application but may in fact be obliged to do so. The provisions of the CSOS are likened to those of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, which make it mandatory for a party to a dispute to initially seek relief from the specialized structure (in this case the CSOS). As such, the processes of the CSOS must be exhausted before a high court may be approached.

The court held that the CSOS is a primary forum to adjudicate matters of this nature and that the Body Corporate’s approach to the courts circumvented the mandatory adjudication processes of the CSOS. Therefore,  the application fell with a costs order against the applicants.

The main takeaway?

Body corporates are legally obliged to abide by the laws set out in the STSMA. They are also obligated to comply with the dispute resolution procedures provided in the STSMA and the CSOS. Where matters fall within the jurisdiction of the CSOS, they should therefore be brought before the appropriate adjudicator or the applicant may face a penalty for not complying with dispute resolution procedures.

Want more Snymans articles? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.

Recommended for you

Transfer and Bond Calculators
Legislative Guidelines

The Financial Intelligence Centre Act of 2001 and Cash Threshold Reporting[post_view before=""]

When does the reporting obligation arise for an accountable or reporting institution?

Read More
Minors and immovable property
Legislative Guidelines

The advantages of a life right[post_view before=""]

The Housing Development Schemes for Retired Persons Act 65 of 1988 introduced life rights as a formal form of ownership for retired people in South Africa. This legislation was implemented not only in response to the growth in the retirement village sector but also to provide legal protection to the elderly.

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Legislative Guidelines

Muslim marriages: A welcome Constitutional Court decision[post_view before=""]

In a long-awaited and groundbreaking decision in the area of family law, the Constitutional Court of South Africa (CC) confirmed the order of constitutional invalidity of the below mentioned Acts, granted by the Supreme Court of Appeal. This decision was confirmed on 28 June 2022.

Read More
Minors and immovable property
Legislative Guidelines

Selling a property without approved building plans[post_view before=""]

It’s often the case that a seller would like to sell – and a purchaser would like to buy – a property without approved building plans or an occupation certificate. But what does the law say?  In terms of the…

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Legislative Guidelines

The Divorce Act and marriage out of community of property without accrual[post_view before=""]

In this article, we explore the issue of the constitutional validity of section 7(3)(1) of the Divorce Act in respect of marriages entered into after 1 November 1984 and excluding the accrual system.

Read More

Need more Snymans content?

Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

CSOS and the courts: where do I take my dispute?

Here’s a look at a recent case which dealt with a dispute between the body corporate and residents in a sectional title scheme.

Buying Property On Auction | Property Blog Articles

The dispute

The body corporate sought an urgent interdict against residents of a unit who had deliberately prevented and frustrated the body corporate from carrying out essential plumbing work next to a shared communal parking space. The estate was experiencing continuous burst water pipes, resulting in excessive water bills and the risk that the insurance company would repudiate their policies with the body corporate.

The court application

In the court application, the residents (the respondents) argued that the body corporate’s (the applicants) approach to seek relief at the High Court was premature. They further argued that the relief sought falls within the jurisdiction of the Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS). The court then had to decide whether the Body Corporate’s application was procedurally correct and could be heard by the High Court instead of the CSOS.

The court’s decision

The court held that the Body Corporate is a body corporate established under the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act (STSMA). In terms of section 3 of the Act, it is mandatory for a body corporate to be registered with the CSOS. As such, the Wingate Body Corporate is subject to the rules, regulations and procedures prescribed by the CSOS.

What is the function of the CSOS?

The CSOS regulates, monitors, and controls the quality of all sectional titles scheme governance documentation. It was established to provide an expeditious, informal and cost-effective mechanism for dispute resolution in community schemes, including urgent disputes.

A closer look at the judgement

Although a high court has concurrent jurisdiction to hear a matter properly brought before it, courts have adopted the view that not all matters brought before them ought to be entertained by the courts. There is, therefore, a preference for adjudication by specialised structures like the CSOS, which have been specifically created to resolve disputes of a particular nature effectively and expeditiously.

The courts held that the CSOS consists of suitably qualified adjudicators and, as such, a court is not only entitled to decline to entertain an application but may in fact be obliged to do so. The provisions of the CSOS are likened to those of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, which make it mandatory for a party to a dispute to initially seek relief from the specialized structure (in this case the CSOS). As such, the processes of the CSOS must be exhausted before a high court may be approached.

The court held that the CSOS is a primary forum to adjudicate matters of this nature and that the Body Corporate’s approach to the courts circumvented the mandatory adjudication processes of the CSOS. Therefore,  the application fell with a costs order against the applicants.

The main takeaway?

Body corporates are legally obliged to abide by the laws set out in the STSMA. They are also obligated to comply with the dispute resolution procedures provided in the STSMA and the CSOS. Where matters fall within the jurisdiction of the CSOS, they should therefore be brought before the appropriate adjudicator or the applicant may face a penalty for not complying with dispute resolution procedures.

Want more Snymans articles? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.