Tuesday, 29 August 2017 13:19

ConCourt ruling on homeowners not liable for historical debt

Written by
Rate this item
(0 votes)

The Constitutional Court in the Case of Chantelle Jordaan and others V City of Tshwane Metropolitan had to determine if Section 118(3) of the Local Government Municipal Systems Act 2000.

Aidan_Kenny_Werkmans

Which provides "an amount due for municipal services fees, surcharges on fees, property rates and other municipal taxes, levies and duties is a charge upon the property in connection which the amount is owing and enjoys preference over any mortgage bond registered against the property"means that the new owner can be saddled with the historical debt which a previous owner incurred.

The Court specifically focused on the words "charged upon property" as contained in Section 118 (3).

The Court had regard to inter alia the historical and common law factors and held that when a legislator creates a transmissible charge (debt) upon property, namely a debt which can be transferred from one person to another, registration in the Deeds office is required.

Notably Section 118 (3) does not require the charge to be registered or noted on the register of deeds. The Court held that this was a telling indication that the charge (the debt) only takes effect on current owners and not new owners unaware of the new historical debt. The debt effectively does not pass to the new owner, as it does not survive transfer.

The Court further held that the bill of rights prohibits arbitrary deprivation of property and Section 118 (3) must be interpreted to the effect that the historical debt of a previous owner does not pass to a new owner. Hence Section 118 (3) must be interpreted that the debt does not pass the new owner. Interestingly the Court did not declare Section 118 (3) invalid, due to the fact that the Section 118 (3) can be interpreted without constitutional objection.

The ruling of the Constitutional Court to the effect that new owners cannot be held liable for the historical debt of a previous owner, is indeed a victory for property owners and financial institutions alike.

This will certainly provide our financial institutions with peace of mind, when borrowing funds for the purchase of property, knowing that neither the owner nor the financial institutions can be deprived of their security, for the sins of the previous owner.

Municipalities will immediately have to desist with the practices of imposing and trying to collect historical debt, which they omitted to collect from a previous owner, from the new owner.

The aforesaid practices of the Municipalities is now finally declared invalid and new owners can justifiably refuse to pay such new historical debt of a previous owner.

Last modified on Thursday, 31 August 2017 13:30

Most Popular

Emira Property Fund's R200m Rosebank office-to-residential conversion meets a high-demand gap in the market

Oct 26, 2017
Emira The Bolton residential development perspective
Emira Property Fund’s value-enhancing conversion of its Rosebank office property assets…

Sky City Mall: The hub of the mega Sky City development

Nov 03, 2017
Sky City Mall Front view
GMI Property Group (GMI), in collaboration with Cosmopolitan Projects are pleased to…

Intu Properties PLC and LaSalle Investment Management announce creation of a 50/50 joint venture to own Intu Chapelfield

Nov 02, 2017
INTU Chapelfield
Intu Properties PLC (‘intu’) and LaSalle Investment Management (‘LaSalle’) acting on…

Attacq Limited appoints Melt Hamman as interim CEO

Oct 24, 2017
Melt Hamman
Attacq Limited (Attacq) today announced that Melt Hamman, the company’s current CFO, will…

Dipula Income Fund grows portfolio to R8.5 Billion through strategic acquisitions

Nov 10, 2017
Izak Petersen1
JSE diversified REIT - Dipula Income Fund (Dipula) - today announced its intention to…