The Johannesburg high court has set aside the decision of the City of Johannesburg to classify rental property belonging to a leasing company as multiple dwellings instead of blocks of flats.

San Ridge Rental Property approached the court challenging the city’s classification decision which it said was without proper justification.

The company became aware that the property was classified as multiple dwellings and not flats in 2019.

The complex consists of 42 blocks, each containing eight flats, making up a total of 470 flats rented to tenants..

The city provides sewerage and sanitation services to the property and levies a charge from the company for this.

According to court papers, the city uses a tariff policy to determine the charges.

“The tariff policy distinguishes between different classes of properties and prescribes charges that may be levied by the city in respect of the different classes.”

The city classified the property as multiple dwellings in terms of the tariff policy for the 2019/2020 financial year.

The prescribed charge for the provision of services to a multiple dwelling is R417,47 per unit per month and R250 per unit per month for a block of flats.

“Since 2019/2020 the city has levied a charge of R417,47 per unit per month” court papers read.

According to San Ridge Rental Property, the city failed to:

• identify who made the decision and when the decision was made;
• explain the criteria used to decide that the property was “multiple dwellings”; and
• provide rationale or reasonable justification for its decision.

The company argued that the city’s decision was irrational as there was no connection between its decision and the means used to reach the decision.

The court found this week that the city failed to state or show which individual or committee took the decision to classify the property as multiple dwellings, when the decision was made and what decision-making process led to it.

“On the information before this court the city’s decision to classify the applicant’s property as 'multiple dwellings' and not as 'blocks of flats' was devoid of any supporting information, reasoning or decision-making process and was manifestly irrational and arbitrary," said judge Rean Strydom.

The city’s contention that the property fell within the definition of “multiple dwellings” was without merit.

“If the plans and photographs of the development or scheme approved by the city are considered, the nature of the property is a clear indication that what has been built are flats within 'blocks of flats'.

“The city’s decision to classify the property as 'multiple dwellings' and not as 'blocks of flats' is irrational and arbitrary and this decision should therefore be reviewed, declared invalid and set aside in terms of sections 6(2)(e)(vi) and 6(2)(f)(ii) of PAJA, and/or in terms of the principle of legality enshrined in section 1C of the constitution,” Strydom ruled.

TimesLIVE