COURT SCRUTINISES WHETHER PROPERTY BROKER’S SERVICES REQUIRED FAIS REGISTRATION
Jurie Wynand Van Dyk t/a Van Dyks Property Brokers v M3T Developments (Pty) Ltd (1478/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 219 (23 August 2024)
This dispute involves a property broker’s claim for commission after successfully helping its developer-client procure project funding from financiers. The developer resisted the claim, arguing that the broker acted as a financial services provider and, since it was not registered as such, the claim for commission was invalid. The court’s assessment offers valuable guidance for managing similar disputes.
The judgment can be viewed here
Summary of the Judgment
LATE BUILDING PENALTY ALLOWED AS A PROVISION OF THE HOA’S MOI AND NOT ITS RULES
Stone River Management Association NPA v Mashoko and Others (A2023/035929) [2024] ZAGPJHC 800 (23 August 2024)
This appeal challenged the order of an adjudicator of the Community Schemes Ombud Service. It centres around the enquiry as to whether the penalty payable for not erecting a home within a certain period is a stand-alone provision of the constitution of a homeowners’ association, or a rule of the association. This distinction is critical as the constitution provides that different consequences flow from breaches of each. The case is a valuable read as it highlights the importance of proper scrutiny of an association’s governing documents before alleging that a penalty was incorrectly levied.