What can estate agents expect with the new Property Practitioners Bill

“I run a small estate agency in town. I’ve been hearing about the new Property Practitioners Act that’s on its way and that will hold important changes for us as estate agents. What will be the main changes that we should expect from this new law?”

For over 40 years estate agents have been regulated by the Estate Agency Affairs Act 112 of 1976 (“Act”). But that is set to change with the new Property Practitioners Bill (“Bill”) which is likely to be passed into law in the near future and holds important changes for estate agents and other property specialists.

The first and most notable change is the definition of a “Property Practitioner” in the Bill. This definition is wide and includes estate agents, mortgage originators, rental agents, property inspectors, valuators, property managers and bond regulators. The aim of this broader definition is to regulate a wider spectrum of persons involved in the property industry and thereby protect consumers and provide for a more controlled structure in the property sector.

The Bill rebrands the Estate Agency Affairs Board (EAAB) as the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority (“Property Practitioners Ombud”). Any complaints from the public against a Property Practitioner will be dealt with by the Property Practitioners Ombud to resolve the complaints. The Property Practitioners Ombud may also be approached to resolve a dispute between Property Practitioners, provided both parties agree to this method of resolution.

In terms of the current Act, estate agents that don’t have a Fidelity Fund Certificate are not allowed to earn commission from any estate agency services. The Bill takes this requirement further by requiring that a Property Practitioner will have to refund the person who paid them if demanded should they not possess a valid Fidelity Fund Certificate. Furthermore, the Bill provides for a broad list of disqualifications from obtaining a Fidelity Fund Certificate, two of the more restrictive disqualifications being where a Property Practitioner is not in possession of a valid BEE certificate or is not in possession of a valid tax clearance certificate.

The preamble of the Bill makes it clear that a focus of the new Bill is to assist in the transformation of the property sector and contribute to such becoming more reflective of the South African demography and assisting Black, Indian and Coloured Property Practitioners to be more active in the property sector. The Bill aims to assist this by establishing a Transformation Fund to be administered by the Department of Human Settlements and the launching of incubation programmes to assist previously disadvantaged Property Practitioners. 

There are also further aspects that the Bill aims to regulate and which you as an estate agent will need to take note of and implement once the Bill is enacted, such as record-keeping requirements, mandatory disclosure forms, etc. 

The Bill has beneficial but also important implications for any estate agency and you would be prudent to monitor developments in relation to the enactment of the Bill to make sure you are prepared for the new requirements the Bill will introduce.

September 10, 2018
Culture vs style: When workplace dress codes cross the line

Culture vs style: When workplace dress codes cross the line

Dress codes are a familiar part of many workplaces, yet employers often fail to calibrate how far they are allowed to go in regulating employee personal appearance. While employers may enforce standards of neatness, safety and professionalism, these rules cannot override constitutional rights, nor can they operate in a discriminatory manner. A recent reminder of this emerged from the Supreme Court of Appeal, where the court had to consider the fairness of dismissing correctional officers for refusing to cut their dreadlocks, contrary to the employer’s dress code.

Competition Commission guidelines on confidential information

Competition Commission guidelines on confidential information

The Competition Commission of South Africa (“Competition Commission”) identified a need to guide merger parties and stakeholders on claiming confidentiality over information. In September 2025, the Competition Commission issued Guidelines on the Commission’s handling of confidential information (“Guidelines”), which, however, are not binding on the Competition Commission, the Competition Tribunal or the Competition Appeal Court, but must be taken into account by these authorities when interpreting and applying the Competition Act 89 of 1998 (“Competition Act”).

Termination of joint ownership, rights in question: PIE Act explained

Termination of joint ownership, rights in question: PIE Act explained

In a recent Western Cape court case where the court ordered the termination of joint ownership of properties, an interesting question arose as to whether the termination of joint ownership did not amount to an eviction contrary to the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, 19 of 1998 (PIE Act)? We look at the requirements for the termination of joint ownership by our courts and whether this can infringe on the PIE Act.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest