Can I be held ransom with a rates clearance certificate for future municipal debts?

“I’m in the process of selling my house. When I requested a property rates clearance certificate from my municipality they requested me to pay the estimated rates until the end of their financial year, which would be months after my house has been transferred to the new owner. Surely I can’t be held ransom for these future rates just because I need a rates clearance certificate?”

In short the answer according to a recent Supreme Court of Appeal case is “no,” you cannot be held liable for payment of the property rates for the entire financial year of the municipality when requesting a rates clearance certificate. 

In the case of Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality v Amber Mountain Investments 3 (Pty) Ltd the municipality required Amber Mountain Investments to pay rates from 1 July 2009 until the end of its financial year, which would be a few months after the date of the registration of the property transfer. Amber Mountain Investments paid the amount of R2 281 014.68 under protest in order to obtain the rates clearance certificate needed for lodgement at the deeds office to register the transfer. However, they were not happy with the fact that they were accountable for R1 066 532.00 more than was actually due and took the municipality to court.

The question the court had to consider was whether a property owner in the case of a sale of property, is liable to pay rates calculated until the end of the financial year of the municipality or until date of registration of the property transfer?

The court held that the intention of the legislature was clear from Section 118 of the Municipal Systems Act that municipalities were only entitled to recover municipal debts due two years prior to the date of application for the clearance certificate, and that the municipality was not entitled to recover future municipal debts for periods which extended beyond this date, irrespective of whether the municipality had a policy in place which determined otherwise. The court accordingly found in favour of Amber Mountain Investments.

If your municipality is accordingly asking you to pay rates estimated until after the date of application for the rates clearance certificate, you should ask your attorney to assist you to bring the outcome of this case to the municipality’s attention.

July 14, 2017
The costly consequences of backdated share transactions

The costly consequences of backdated share transactions

The South African legislative framework regards backdated shares as a suspicious and illegal practice, as it arises when a share issue or transfer is recorded as having occurred on an earlier date than the actual transaction. While backdating may be viewed as an administrative oversight, the consequences may constitute compliance risk, serious misconduct on directors, beneficial owners and compliance officers who authorise the backdating of share transactions. This is because backdated shares may manipulate the timing of funds, obscure the source of funds, and distort a company’s beneficial ownership structure.

Tax transparency matters: Are your deals reportable?

Tax transparency matters: Are your deals reportable?

Some deals come with hidden reporting duties. Find out when your transactions could trigger SARS disclosure rules, and how to stay compliant. You may have heard the term “reportable arrangement” in tax conversations around commercial transactions. It sounds technical, and it is, but at its core, it’s about transparency. The South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) seeks information on certain transactions that could be used to avoid or reduce tax. If you enter a reportable arrangement, you may be legally required to report it. Failure to comply can result in significant penalties.

Tinsel, trolleys, and traps: Outsmarting the Black Friday storm

Tinsel, trolleys, and traps: Outsmarting the Black Friday storm

As Black Friday specials and festive-season sales saturate the market, retailers compete with promises of “unbeatable” discounts and “blink-and-you-miss-it” deals. But even in the frenzy, the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (the “CPA”) still applies. Designed to curb deceptive advertising, ensure fair pricing, and guarantee that goods remain of acceptable quality, the CPA sets the rules of the game. Understanding these rights is essential for both suppliers and shoppers, helping prevent year-end discounts from turning into disputes.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest