Think Your Municipal Bill Is Incorrect? Here’s What the Law Says

When municipalities overcharge or delay issuing clearance certificates, it doesn’t just cause frustration, it raises important questions about fairness and accountability.



Our firm recently represented a Company in an Application against the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality.

After hearing the Application, the Court found that:

1.1    The City of Tshwane is not entitled to charge interest on the arrears of Municipal charges, as reflected in a Municipal Account, which accrues as a
    result of an incorrect and inflated Municipal valuation of the property, which was used to calculate the property rates payable in respect of the
    Property for the period June 2020 to November 2022.

1.2    It was further declared that the Municipality is only entitled to charge interest on the Municipal Account of the property in accordance with the
    provisions of Section 55 of the Local Government: Municipal Property Rates Act 6 of 2004.

1.3    Finally, the Court found that the First Respondent is not entitled to include interest charged as on the alleged rear Municipal charges when it
    issues Clearance figures as required in terms of Section 118 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000.

In addition to the aforementioned, the Court directed the Municipality to correct the Municipal Account of the Applicant.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned Order, the Municipality included the amount of R285,000.00 on the Clearance figures in terms of Section 118(1)(a) of the Municipal Systems Act.

Our firm demanded compliance with the Order of the 9th of July 2025 and demanded that the interest be removed from the Municipal Clearance figures.

The Municipality took the stance that, notwithstanding the Order, they are entitled to levy interest for purposes of Municipal Clearance.

Due to the flagrant noncompliance of the Municipality with the Order, we instituted Urgent proceedings to compel compliance with the 9th of July 2025 Order and on the 29th of September 2025, the High Court of Pretoria made an Order stating inter alia:

“ The Respondents are found to be in contempt of the Order handed down by the Honourable Manamela AJ on 9 July 2025 “.

In addition to the above, the Municipality was directed to purge its contempt by issuing Clearance figures which are free of interest.

What This Means for Property Owners

This case offers valuable insight into how property owners can protect themselves against municipal overreach or administrative delay.

1. You Have the Right to Fair Administrative Action

Municipalities must make decisions that are lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair - as guaranteed by Section 33 of the Constitution and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA).
If your clearance figures are incorrect or a dispute is ignored or delayed, you can demand written reasons and challenge the inaction under PAJA.

 2. Clearance Figures Must Reflect Only What’s Legally Due

Under Section 118, municipalities may only require payment for amounts actually charged for the preceding two years before issuing a clearance certificate.
The municipality cannot add interest, old debt, or unrelated service charges. If they do, you are entitled to request a corrected statement or approach the court to compel compliance with section 118. 

 3. Overbilling Can Be Reversed

If you’ve been overcharged due to inflated property valuations or incorrect rates, you can apply for an adjustment or refund.
In the Pretoria case, the municipality was eventually compelled to credit millions of rands to the property account - proving that persistent, lawful action can correct administrative errors.

4. Municipalities Are Accountable to the Courts

Municipalities have a constitutional duty to comply with court orders. If they fail to act, courts can enforce compliance or incarcerate municipal officials due to non-compliance. This ensures that public officials remain accountable to the courts and ratepayers.



5. Unreasonable Delays Can Be Challenged

Financial losses due to administrative inaction can delay property transfer or cause the seller to pay unfair or inflated amounts to the municipality courts.

In some cases, Courts can compel a municipality to act within a set timeframe to prevent prejudice.

Conclusion

The Pretoria High Court ruling (Case No. 2025/011201) reinforces the principle that municipalities must operate within their legal mandates, with fairness and transparency. Property owners are not powerless - South African administrative law holds public bodies accountable for Administrative action/inaction and for contempt of court.

If you believe a government department or municipality has acted unfairly or unlawfully, consult Roodt Law or visit us at roodtlaw.com