Repealing Equal Levies and Returning to PQ: How to Unwind a Section 11(2) Rule
By Jennifer Paddock
An interesting and unusual question was posted to Paddocks Club recently. Essentially, in a sectional title scheme where sections range in size from 20 square meter studios to 360 square meter penthouses, there was a developer-imposed rule that all owners are equally liable for levies and have equal voting rights. This has been the case for years, but recently owners have started asking if the participation quota (PQ) would be a better, and fairer, formula to apply. And the question was: How do we do this?
The Legal Default
Here’s some important context before I answer the question.
The default position under section 11(1) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, 2011 (STSMA) is that owners’ liability for contributions to the body corporate and the value of their vote is based on the PQ allocated to their section, as set out in the scheme’s sectional plan. In residential schemes, the PQ is based on the floor area of the section, so essentially, the larger your section, the more you pay and the more weight your vote carries.
Changing the Default – Section 11(2) Rules
However, many sectional title schemes have a rule that changes this default position, for example that all owners contribute equally and have equal vote values, despite the fact that the floor areas of their sections vary in size. Such a rule is known as a ‘section 11(2) rule’ and is most often imposed by the developer at the time of opening the scheme’s sectional title register. But section 11(2) rules can also be made later by the body corporate itself.
Can a Body Corporate Amend or Repeal a Section 11(2) Rule?
Yes. However, the STSMA doesn’t provide a unique repeal mechanism for section 11(2) rules, as it does for creating them. Therefore, the ordinary section 10(2) pathway for changing rules applies:
- If the section 11(2) rule sits in the body corporate’s management rules, then section 10(2)(a) applies and a unanimous resolution is required to repeal it, plus of course CSOS approval under section 10(5).
- If the section 11(2) rule sits in the body corporate’s conduct rules, then section 10(2)(b) applies and a special resolution is required to repeal it, again, plus CSOS approval under section 10(5).
Once CSOS has approved the repeal, the default position under section 11(1) STSMA kicks in and the PQ then applies. No additional rule needs to be adopted.
Does s 11(2)(b) “adversely affected owner consent” apply to a repeal?
No. Section 11(2)(b) says that where the body corporate decides to adopt a rule under section 11(2) to change the effect of the PQ and an owner would be adversely affected by that decision, the owner’s prior written consent is required. This safeguard applies when introducing a section 11(2) regime, not when repealing a section 11(2) rule to restore the default section 11(1) position.
Conclusion
In summary, while adopting a section 11(2) rule may come with additional hoops for the body corporate to jump through, a section 11(2) rule is repealed just like any other management or conduct rule (depending on which set it was added to). The ‘written consent of adversely affected owners’ proviso only applies to adopting a section 11(2) rule, not repealing one.
Please note: Paddocks Club is our membership-only platform with a wealth of resources accessible for a nominal fee. It’s also the quickest and most affordable way to get reliable advice on sectional title issues whenever you need it. Here, members can ask questions and have them answered by Jennifer Paddock, usually within 24 hours. For more info and to join, visit https://club.paddocks.co.za
_________________________________
Article reference: Paddocks Press: December 2025, Volume 20, Issue 11
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Recent Comments