Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

SAHRC vs Lagardien: The sign came down, but the principle stays up

October 15, 2026

Dealership ordered to refund R323,950 for faulty car advertised in ‘excellent condition’

October 15, 2026

Lease, R228 million tender and assassination plots in Matlala’s mounting legal battles

October 15, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • SAHRC vs Lagardien: The sign came down, but the principle stays up
  • Dealership ordered to refund R323,950 for faulty car advertised in ‘excellent condition’
  • Lease, R228 million tender and assassination plots in Matlala’s mounting legal battles
  • Elections analyst surprised but not shocked by ANC ballot ruling, Terry Tselane defends IEC
  • Fraud conviction set aside due to unregistered candidate attorney’s role in trial
  • Moepya commits IEC to ANC ballot changes and pledges review of nomination rules
  • Body corporate loses execution order after summons went missing in its own building
  • Malawi court blocks Bushiris’ extradition to SA, citing evidentiary and procedural defects
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » unenforceable rules in sectional title schemes
Sectional Title Law

Unenforceable rules in sectional title schemes can leave trustees without legal authority

Ashwini SinghBy Ashwini SinghOctober 3, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
Trustees reviewing levy budgets and legal documents during a body corporate meeting in a sectional title scheme.
Picture: pixabay.com
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • Scheme rules must comply with the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act and its prescribed rules.
  • Old house rules may no longer be enforceable where they were not properly incorporated and registered.
  • Unregistered rules and policies, including trustees’ circulars, cannot simply create new enforceable obligations.

Sectional title schemes in South Africa are undoubtedly governed and regulated by current statutes and the common law.

Quite frequently, disputes arise in schemes based on the interpretation of the laws, including a scheme’s rules. However, there is the further aspect of whether or not a rule can be enforced in a scheme on the basis of its registration and validity.

The Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 2011

Section 10 of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 recognises that a scheme may have its own specific management or conduct rules which are enforceable given that such rules are registered in the Deeds Office or with the Community Schemes Ombud Service.

It is of note that rules can only be lodged with the above bodies after an appropriate resolution has been passed by the corresponding body corporate, with the correct procedure adhered to for taking the resolution.

Such rules may only be enforced after confirmation is received from the Deeds Office or the Ombud that it has been registered therein. Conversely, there are several circumstances where a scheme’s rules can become an issue for enforcement.

Incompatible rules

The Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 2011 created Prescribed Management Rules and Prescribed Conduct Rules under its regulations, commonly known as the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Regulations 2016.

These prescribed rules must be complied with, in addition to the scheme’s own registered rules. If a scheme has a rule that is incompatible with the above prescribed rules, then the prescribed rules prevail, irrespective of whether or not the scheme’s rule is registered with the Deeds Office or the Ombud, as the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 2011 takes precedence.

House rules

Under the original Sectional Titles Act 1971, there was a provision for what was called “House rules”, alternatively referred to as “Schedule 3 rules”. These were an additional schedule of rules separate from a scheme’s management and conduct rules that were entirely created by the trustees and were intended to supplement the existing rules.

Unfortunately, house rules gave exclusive power to the trustees to establish them without the input of the body corporate. As a result, these types of rules were removed as a category of acceptable rules.

Under the subsequent Sectional Titles Act 1986, only management and conduct rules were allowed. Consequently, a lot of older sectional title schemes consolidated their house rules with their conduct rules and registered them as such in the Deeds Office.

For the schemes that did not register any amendments, their body corporate cannot enforce any house rules as they are no longer recognised, nor can they be created as a type of rule under the current legislation.

Unregistered ‘rules’

Similarly, any types of rules or policies in a body corporate that are neither registered nor prescribed rules in terms of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 2011 or its 2016 Regulations cannot be enforced in a scheme.

Typical examples include trustees’ circulars attempting to create new rules for a scheme without the appropriate body corporate resolution passing a rule to be registered with the Deeds Office or Ombud.

Therefore, the golden rule is that if a “rule” is not registered with the appropriate body or compatible with the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 2011, then it cannot be enforced within a scheme.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

Got a question for Ashwini Singh on this matter? Send it to expert@conviction.co.za

Body corporate community schemes Property law Sectional title Trustees
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Ashwini Singh

Law academic and affiliate of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, South Africa.

Related Posts

Body corporate loses execution order after summons went missing in its own building

October 15, 2026

Tenant who withheld R1.4 million in rent, citing maintenance failures, ordered to leave property

October 13, 2026

Emily Moon River Lodge challenges minister’s decision to close public access route

October 13, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 6   +   9   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Your driving licence at the gate: What estates can actually legally scan

Sponsor: My Estate LifeSeptember 6, 2026

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
Don't Miss
Opinion
9 Mins Read

SAHRC vs Lagardien: The sign came down, but the principle stays up

By Sikhander CoopooOctober 15, 20269 Mins Read

On 6 October 2026, the Equality Court in Gqeberha handed down a judgment that many…

Dealership ordered to refund R323,950 for faulty car advertised in ‘excellent condition’

October 15, 2026

Lease, R228 million tender and assassination plots in Matlala’s mounting legal battles

October 15, 2026

Elections analyst surprised but not shocked by ANC ballot ruling, Terry Tselane defends IEC

October 15, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Your driving licence at the gate: What estates can actually legally scan

Sponsor: My Estate LifeSeptember 6, 2026

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024
OUR PICKS

APRAV welcomes new RAF boss and rejects Road Accident Benefit Scheme revival plan

October 9, 2026

Business owner ordered to pay R200,000 for banning LGBTQ+ people from his shop

October 11, 2026

Tenant who withheld R1.4 million in rent, citing maintenance failures, ordered to leave property

October 13, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Buy Now
  • Law & Justice

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by