INCONSISTENT APPLICATION OF RULES IN AN HOA & THE CSOS ADJUDICATOR’S RESPONSIBILITY
Reddy and Another v Cedar Lakes Homeowners Association NPC and Others (A018904/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 468 (17 May 2024)
One would think that, with photographic evidence showing that an HOA had previously allowed deviations from its architectural rules, an adjudicator would critically probe why it then refused another owner’s request for a similar alteration. The absence of an examination of the facts presented moved the disgruntled owner to appeal to the High Court. As an appeal against a CSOS ruling is only available in respect of a point of law (and not regarding factual conclusions), was the adjudicator’s finding appealable? Yes, as the court indicated in this matter.
The judgment and summary below highlight the reasoning of the court.
The judgment can be viewed here
Summary of the Judgment
FICA COMPLIANCE: A JOB FOR PROPERTY PRACTITIONERS OR ONLY ESTATE AGENTS?
Public Compliance Communication 56
The Property Practitioners Act, which came into operation in 2022, repealed the Estate Agency Affairs Act. The former has a wide definition of a ‘property practitioner’ – extending well beyond the repealed Act’s definition of an ‘estate agent’ – and includes property developers, property managers, bridging finance providers and other role players in the real estate industry. The Financial Intelligence Centre Act names the accountable institutions that must comply with its onerous provisions in Schedule 1 thereto. Included therein is an ‘estate agent as defined in the Estate Agency Affairs Act, 1976.’ Does this mean that the reference in the Schedule must be read to refer to the Property Practitioners Act (and therefore require compliance from these additional businesses)? No, explains the important communication from the Financial Intelligence Centre below.
