The recent judgment in Parch Properties 72 (Pty) Ltd v Summervale Lifestyle Estate Owner’s Association and Others 2026 (1) SA 449 (SCA) (17 October 2025) has brought welcome clarity to the long‑standing question of whether the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act) limits the jurisdiction of the High Court.
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) confirmed that the CSOS Act does not exclude the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction. Rather than operating as an exclusive forum, CSOS serves as an alternative, cost‑effective dispute resolution mechanism for community schemes. Parties may therefore still choose to approach the courts directly.
Background: The jurisdiction debate
For years, sectional title owners, developers, and industry stakeholders believed that governance and administrative disputes relating to community schemes had to be referred to CSOS. The SCA’s decision in Parch Properties has now resolved this uncertainty.
The dispute
Parch Properties owned land adjacent to the Summervale Lifestyle Estate and wished to incorporate its development into the Summervale Homeowners’ Association (HOA). This required an amendment to the HOA’s constitution. After years of unsuccessful attempts, due largely to resistance from certain owners, Parch Properties approached the Western Cape Division of the High Court for an order declaring the incorporation of its development into the HOA.
The respondents opposed the application, arguing that the dispute fell within the ambit of the CSOS Act and therefore had to be referred to CSOS. They contended that the High Court’s role was limited to appeals and reviews arising from CSOS decisions.
The SCA’s decision
In addressing the issue of jurisdiction, the SCA emphasised the purpose of the CSOS Act: to provide a speedy, informal, and affordable mechanism for resolving community scheme disputes. Crucially, the Court held that:
- The High Court retains its inherent jurisdiction, unless explicitly or implicitly excluded by statute.
- The CSOS Act does not expressly or implicitly oust the High Court’s jurisdiction.
- The CSOS Act was created to function alongside, not in place of, the courts.
- Parties retain the freedom to choose between approaching the CSOS or the High Court.
Significance of the ruling
This judgment provides certainty for bodies corporate, homeowners’ associations, owners, and developers. It confirms that parties are not restricted to the CSOS route and may approach the courts directly when appropriate, particularly in urgent or complex matters requiring immediate judicial intervention.
The decision reinforces an important principle: while CSOS offers valuable access to justice, it does not bar individuals from seeking relief through the High Court.
Disclaimer: This article is the personal opinion/view of the author(s) and does not necessarily present the views of the firm. The content is provided for information only and should not be seen as an exact or complete exposition of the law. Accordingly, no reliance should be placed on the content for any reason whatsoever, and no action should be taken on the basis thereof unless its application and accuracy have been confirmed by a legal advisor. The firm and author(s) cannot be held liable for any prejudice or damage resulting from action taken based on this content without further written confirmation by the author(s).
Source: https://www.sdblaw.co.za/Our-Insights/ArticleDetail?Title=CSOS-or-Court?-The-choice-is-yours
