- Remote work has become a permanent feature of modern employment, not a temporary shift.
- Sectional title law prohibits using residential units for business purposes that change their intended use.
- Online work inside a private unit is difficult to regulate unless it creates a proven nuisance.
The rapid rise of remote and hybrid work has fundamentally changed how people earn a living, and along with it has come a legal tension that many residents in sectional title schemes are only beginning to notice.
Working from home has become completely normal across just about every industry, yet the law still draws a firm line between simply working remotely and actually running a business from a residential unit. That distinction carries very real consequences for owners and occupiers.
Remote work picked up serious momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic and has since settled into something far more permanent. Employers have come to appreciate the reduced costs and access to a broader talent pool, while employees have embraced the flexibility, the shorter commute and a better balance between work and personal life. With digital tools now woven into everyday professional life, a home office has become less of a luxury and more of a practical necessity.
Where things get more complicated is when the work being done at home starts to look less like remote employment and more like a business operating out of a residential property. Property law does not treat all home-based activity the same way, and that is where a lot of misunderstandings tend to creep in.
The legal limits of using a residential unit
Legal and property law expert Ashwini Singh puts it plainly. “When it comes to an owner or occupier running a business out of a residential scheme, the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act Regulations prohibit doing that.” She goes on to explain that “Prescribed Management Rule 30(f) disallows an owner or occupier from using their section for any purpose other than its intended use.”
On how that intended use is actually determined, Singh explains that “the intended use of a section can be shown expressly or by implication on either a registered sectional plan or an approved building plan.” She adds that “the intended use can also be made obvious from the construction, layout and available amenities of the section” and that “it can also be reasonably inferred from the applicable town planning by-laws or the relevant rules of the body corporate.”
In short, a residential unit needs to stay residential in character. Activities that bring commercial elements into the mix, especially those involving client visits, delivery traffic or operational disruption, can amount to an unlawful use of the section. As Singh puts it, “An owner or occupier cannot run a business out of their section in a residential scheme.”
Singh, a law academic and an affiliate of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, South Africa, offers some practical examples of where the line gets crossed. “Typical examples of illegally running a business can include if a person runs a consulting or trading business or sells items from their section and generates traffic within the scheme.” The consequences are not trivial either. “This can constitute both a nuisance as well as a contravention of the Prescribed Management Rules and can be subject to an order in terms of Section 39(2)(a) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act, where a person can be compelled by the Ombud to refrain from acting in a specified way.”
Why remote work is treated differently
Things become considerably more nuanced when the activity in question takes place entirely online. Unlike a traditional business, remote work does not usually generate physical traffic, visible trading or any real disruption within the scheme. That makes enforcement a much more complicated matter.
Singh is candid about this distinction. “The enforceability of the rules becomes less straightforward when online or remote work is to be considered.” She acknowledges the practical limitation that bodies corporate face. “While a person cannot advertise and generate traffic into their section in the manner of a physical business, working remotely or online and attending meetings virtually from within their section is difficult for a body corporate to regulate.”
Underlying all of this is the constitutional right to privacy. Owners and occupiers are entitled to use their units without unlawful intrusion, and a body corporate simply cannot monitor or interfere with ordinary private activities happening inside a section. Singh is clear on this. “Owners and occupiers maintain their constitutional right to privacy within their sections.” She adds that “a body corporate cannot intrude upon a person’s personal sphere where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.”
She puts the difficulty of enforcement into practical perspective. “It is not easy to determine whether a person is watching TV, listening to a podcast, chatting with a friend, on the phone or attending a class online, nor is it lawful to intrude on such similar sounding activities occurring within a section.”
When conduct crosses into a nuisance
The law does provide a way to intervene when conduct becomes genuinely disruptive. If an occupier’s activities unreasonably interfere with their neighbours, the matter can be addressed as a nuisance. That said, the threshold for what qualifies is not a low one.
Singh draws the boundary carefully. “If the activity constitutes a nuisance, it would have to be addressed in that context and with evidence.” She is also quick to caution against overreach. “An owner or occupier merely making noise while in a webinar or online class does not constitute a noise nuisance.” The bar is set higher than that. “It would have to be an unreasonable noise nuisance, subject to the municipal by-laws, that must be tangibly proven with evidence.”
The role of CSOS guidance and owner consent
The regulatory picture has been further clarified through the Consolidated Practice Directives 1 of 2025, approved by the Acting Chief Ombud on 18 July 2025. These directives offer guidance to sectional title schemes on how to approach home-based business activities within the framework of Section 13(1)(g) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act.
Section 13(1)(g) reinforces that a unit may not be used for a purpose other than its intended use unless all owners in the scheme provide written consent. That provision does leave a narrow pathway for lawful deviation, but getting unanimous consent from all owners is, in practice, rarely straightforward.
When read alongside Prescribed Management Rule 30(f), the overall picture becomes quite clear. The body corporate has a duty to ensure sections are used in keeping with their intended purpose, and any deviation from that must either remain within the scope of that purpose or be formally approved by all owners.
The bottom line for residents
The law draws a careful but firm distinction, and Singh captures it well. “Running a business in a residential scheme is prohibited.” On the question of remote activity, she is equally clear. “Online meetings, classes and webinars are not something that can be directly regulated by a body corporate when considering an individual’s right to privacy within their section.”
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
3 Comments
I live in a complex where the chairman is running a business from his unit. His wife was running one there before. They are taking turns
someone was trying to run a clothing fashion biz at my estate
didnt make it far
An old man and his wife were using their garage unit for consulting…they got into BIG trouble.