South African residential estates failed to obtain a court order confirming that accreditation fees charged to agents are legal. The Gauteng Local Division in Johannesburg dismissed an application from the Residential Communities Council (RCC) on 20 October 2026, deciding that the lawfulness of these fees must be assessed for each specific case. The Association of Residential Communities (ARC) also participated in the RCC’s application.
The RCC, representing 181 estates, argued that the Property Practitioners Act regulates agents, not estates, and that the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority (PPRA) has no jurisdiction over what homeowners’ associations (HOAs) and body corporates charge. Estates claim these fees cover training, security, advertising, and administration. The PPRA countered that annual fees range from R5,000 to R50,000 per estate, in addition to what agents already pay for PPRA registration and Fidelity Fund certificates.
Court Rules Against Blanket Approval
Acting Judge NS Krüger found that the RCC failed to make a compelling case for blanket relief. The court held that the lawfulness of accreditation fees depends on factors such as the type of organization, its functions, the fees charged, and the conditions under which they are imposed. The judge also ordered the RCC to pay costs, including fees for two counsel on Scale C, the highest cost scale, reserved for cases of exceptional complexity or importance.
The judge warned that such fees could limit consumers’ choice of agent, increase costs, and create barriers for new practitioners. The ruling does not make every estate accreditation fee unlawful, but it doesn’t give estates permission to charge them either. It leaves the issue open to interpretation based on individual circumstances. Among the examples before the court was a homeowner charged a R10,000 penalty for selling through his wife, a registered practitioner, because she hadn’t paid the estate’s accreditation fee.
Read Also: VELUX launches new mid range glass rooflight
The PPRA has long argued that estates cannot require agents to pay to operate within their premises. In November 2025, it suspended enforcement of the relevant parts of regulation 35 against arrangements between agents and HOAs while the court case was pending. During this period, agents were required to provide a written undertaking to pay the fees if the estates won the case.
Implications for Agents and Estates
The ruling puts agents in a precarious position. Even if an estate falls outside the PPRA’s reach, the agent who paid does not. Rebosa, whose members employ about 17,800 registered practitioners, filed an affidavit supporting the PPRA’s stance.
Human Settlements Minister Thembi Simelane welcomed the judgment, stating it allows the department to continue working towards a fair and transparent property sector. However, it remains unclear whether the PPRA’s suspension of enforcement is still in effect, as it was tied to a final court decision, and the RCC can still appeal.
