A recent ruling from the Gauteng High Court (Pretoria) has brought good news for sectional titles, estates and community schemes.

The court ruled that a litigant cannot accept the benefits of a settlement offer while rejecting the conditions attached to it, especially when those conditions relate to cost.

Johlene Wasserman, director of community schemes and compliance at VDM Incorporated, welcomed the court’s confirmation: ‘The court’s November judgment is an excellent one that offers important clarity for community schemes.’

BusinessTech reports that the dispute began when a homeowner clashed with a Centurion HOA over her revised building plans. When the HOA initially refused to approve her plans, the homeowner launched a court review. When the matter was taken to court, the HOA changed course.

‘It approved the plans and delivered them to the homeowner under a formal Rule 34 settlement offer, marked ‘without prejudice’ and expressly excluding any contribution to her legal costs,’ said Wasserman.

BusinessTech notes that the homeowner accepted the benefit, using the approved plans to secure municipal approval and obtain her occupation certificate.

However, she continued litigating, arguing that the HOA’s approval was an independent administrative act and was not part of the settlement offer.

‘The court rejected that argument outright. It held that the approval was clearly tendered as part of a conditional settlement, and the fact that the plans were stamped before delivery did not magically detach them from the terms of the offer. In simple terms, you can’t take the performance and reject the terms. Settlement doesn’t work that way,’ said Wasserman.

By the time the matter was heard, the dispute was essentially over, as the homeowner had already obtained the relief sought.

Full BusinessTech report

Judgment