The answer comes down to a line neither of them can see.

In our latest article, founder Jannie Smit explains the median line — one of the most important concepts in sectional title, and one of the least understood. It quietly decides who is responsible for almost every repair in your scheme, and it isn’t even in the Act most owners think to check.
Inside:

→ Where the median line actually lives (hint: not the STSMA)
→ Who owns the roof, the slab between units, and the shared wall
→ Why windows and doors are split 50/50
→ Pipes and geysers — the “what does it serve?” test, and the geyser-insurance trap
→ A real CSOS case where a neighbour was ordered to fix the damage they caused

Once you know where the line runs, most “who pays?” arguments answer themselves.

One of the most common calls we receive at Urban Property Management starts almost exactly the same way.

“Jannie, there’s water coming through my ceiling. Who is responsible?”

Within minutes, everyone has an opinion. The upstairs owner insists the leak isn’t coming from their unit. The downstairs owner wants immediate repairs. Trustees are copied into emails, insurance is mentioned, and before long everyone is debating who should pay.

The interesting part is that the answer often comes down to something nobody can actually see, an invisible legal boundary called the median line.

It is one of the most important concepts in sectional title law, yet it remains one of the least understood. In our experience, many disputes that end up before the Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS) could have been resolved much earlier if everyone understood this single principle.

The Answer Isn’t Where Most People Think
Most owners and even many trustees assume the rules about maintenance responsibilities are found entirely in the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act (STSMA), because that Act governs the day-to-day management of a scheme.

Surprisingly, the principle of the median line isn’t found there.

It originates in section 5 of the Sectional Titles Act 95 of 1986, which defines the legal boundaries of a section. Section 5(4) provides that the common boundary between sections, or between a section and the common property, is the median line of the dividing wall, floor or ceiling.

Although the Sectional Titles Act primarily deals with the creation and registration of sectional title schemes, this principle remains fundamental when determining where one section ends and another begins.

The Easiest Way to Picture It
Imagine every dividing wall, floor and ceiling being sliced perfectly down the middle by an invisible pane of glass.

That invisible line is the legal boundary.

Everything on your side of that line generally forms part of your section, while everything beyond it forms part of another section or the common property. However, it is important to remember that ownership and maintenance responsibilities are not always identical. The STSMA, the Prescribed Management Rules, the scheme’s registered rules and insurance arrangements can allocate maintenance responsibilities differently in certain circumstances.

Understanding where the boundary lies is simply the starting point.

What Does This Mean in Practice?
Once you understand the median line, many common disputes become much easier to analyse.

Roofs, foundations and external walls
The roof sits beyond the median line of the uppermost ceiling and forms part of the common property. Foundations likewise remain common property.

External walls are slightly different. The median line establishes the legal boundary through the centre of the wall. In practice, however, the body corporate will often remain responsible for maintaining the structural integrity and external fabric of the building in terms of its statutory obligations, even though the boundary itself lies through the middle.

The inside of your section
The finishes inside your section; paint, plaster, cupboards, floor coverings, sanitary fittings and similar items, will generally fall within the owner’s responsibility unless the legislation, the scheme’s rules or insurance arrangements provide otherwise.

Shared walls
Where two owners share a wall, the legal boundary runs through its centre. Each owner owns their side of the boundary, but responsibility for maintenance should always be considered together with the applicable legislation and the scheme’s rules before assumptions are made.

The concrete slab between two units
This surprises many owners.

The concrete slab separating an upstairs and downstairs unit is not automatically common property. The median line runs through the middle of the slab, meaning each section extends to the midpoint.

That legal boundary often becomes important when determining responsibility for damage caused by water leaks.

Windows and doors
Section 5(5) of the Sectional Titles Act provides that windows and doors situated in boundary walls are deemed to form part of those walls.

The median line therefore also applies to them. However, responsibility for maintaining or replacing windows and doors is not always determined solely by the boundary. It can also depend on the STSMA, the scheme’s registered management or conduct rules and the insurance arrangements applicable to that particular scheme.

This is why every situation should be considered on its own facts rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach.

Ownership Is Only Half the Story
One of the biggest misconceptions we encounter is that determining ownership automatically determines responsibility.

It doesn’t. The median line establishes the legal boundary.

The cause of the damage determines who may ultimately be responsible for carrying out repairs.

Take the leaking shower example.

The stain appears on the downstairs owner’s ceiling, but the source of the leak is the upstairs owner’s failed shower waterproofing.

Although the legal boundary runs through the slab between the two sections, the owner whose section caused the damage may still be responsible for repairing not only the source of the leak but also the consequential damage suffered by the neighbouring owner.

This is why professional leak detection reports are so important. Before responsibility can fairly be allocated, the source of the problem must first be established.

What the CSOS Has Confirmed
A useful example is FC Schumacher v Michael Bronn (CSOS 8183/KZN/23).

In that matter, professional leak detection established that water ingress originated from a neighbouring owner’s balcony and drainage system. The adjudicator ordered repairs to be carried out to address both the source of the leak and the damage caused to the neighbouring section.

The case highlights an important principle.

Under section 39(6)(b)(i) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act, an adjudicator may order a person to carry out specified repairs where appropriate.

In other words, the median line determines the legal boundary, while the cause of the damage often determines who must remedy the consequences.

Water Pipes, Plumbing and Geysers
Few issues create more disagreement than plumbing.

While the median line still plays a role, the more practical question is usually:

What does the pipe actually serve?

As a general principle:

Pipework serving only one section will usually be the responsibility of that owner.
Pipework serving multiple sections or the common property will generally fall under the body corporate.

This practical approach is widely applied by managing agents, insurers and adjudicators, although every scheme’s registered rules should still be consulted before reaching a final conclusion.

Again, establishing the source of the leak remains critical. Water often appears in one place while the actual defect is somewhere completely different.

Geysers
Another area that causes regular confusion is geysers.

In many sectional title schemes, the owner is responsible for maintaining and servicing the geyser, even though the geyser itself may be insured under the body corporate’s building insurance policy.

That often leads owners to believe the body corporate is responsible for everything.

It isn’t that simple.

Insurance may pay for the insured event, subject to the policy terms and applicable excesses, while the owner remains responsible for the proper maintenance of the geyser. If poor maintenance contributed to the failure, further liability may arise depending on the circumstances.

As always, each scheme’s insurance policy and registered rules should be considered before making assumptions.

Exclusive Use Areas
The median line isn’t limited to sections.

Regulation 5(1)(m) under the Sectional Titles Act applies the same principle to exclusive use areas that are defined by physical boundaries, unless the sectional plan provides otherwise.

For example, where two exclusive use gardens are separated by a fence, the legal boundary will generally run through the median line of that dividing structure.

Again, however, maintenance responsibilities should always be considered together with the applicable rules governing the scheme.

Why These Disputes Escalate
In my experience, most disputes don’t arise because owners refuse to accept responsibility. They arise because opinions are formed before the facts have been established.

Someone assumes.
Someone authorises repairs.
Someone submits an insurance claim.

Only afterwards does anyone ask where the boundary actually lies or what caused the damage.

By then, positions have hardened and what could have been a straightforward maintenance issue becomes a dispute between neighbours or, worse, a CSOS application.

The Approach We Take at Urban Property Management
Whenever we’re asked, “Who is responsible?”, we don’t guess.

We start with three questions:

What does the sectional plan show?
What do the Sectional Titles Act, the STSMA, the scheme’s registered rules and the insurance arrangements require?
What actually caused the damage?

Once those questions have been answered, responsibility usually becomes remarkably clear.

That approach doesn’t just resolve a repair.

It helps trustees make informed decisions, protects owners from unnecessary costs, reduces conflict between neighbours and often prevents matters from escalating into formal disputes.

The median line may be invisible, but understanding it can save a scheme significant time, money and frustration.

If your scheme is uncertain about maintenance responsibilities, or you’d rather resolve a dispute before it reaches the CSOS, obtaining the correct advice at the outset is almost always easier than untangling the consequences afterwards.

This article is provided for general information and does not constitute legal advice. Boundary and maintenance responsibility can turn on the specific wording of a scheme’s sectional plan and rules; owners facing a dispute should obtain advice tailored to their scheme.

This article is provided for general information and does not constitute legal advice. Boundary and maintenance responsibility can turn on the specific wording of a scheme’s sectional plan and rules; owners facing a dispute should obtain advice tailored to their scheme.

Jannie Smith – Owner and Managing Director – Urban Property Management

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jannie Smit is the founder and Managing Director of Urban Property Management, a Pretoria-based Residential Community Management company built on one principle: every scheme deserves a managing agent who actually cares.

With deep experience across sectional title governance, residential community management, business planning, and stakeholder negotiation, Jannie leads a team that treats every trustee query, owner concern, and maintenance request as if it were their own. His approach is simple — be reachable, be honest, and get it right the first time.

When he isn’t helping trustees navigate reserve funds, AGMs, and CSOS compliance, he’s probably thinking about how to do it better.

🔗 Connect with Jannie on LinkedIn: Jannie Smit | LinkedIn

🌐 Learn more about our services:

Homeowners Association Management
Sectional Title Scheme Management
Property Developers
Compliance
Maintenance Management Services
Get a Quote

📞 012 004 3322 ·

💬 WhatsApp: 063 860 4850