Building fees in Cyprus: the committee must prove the charge

In short

A management committee sued a flat owner for €952 in unpaid fees and lost: it could not prove a lawful decision, a lawful use of the fund or a split by floor area.

Klitos Platis, advocate

Your first message costs nothing: within one working day we tell you whether we can help and what it would cost.

Email Klitos Platis WhatsApp Enquiry form

klitos@kleanthousplatis.com

A management committee that sues an owner for unpaid building fees must prove that the charge was lawful, not merely that it was unpaid. On 29 October 2026 the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the committee of a block of flats in Nicosia, which had claimed €952 in monthly contributions from one owner and lost at trial.

The amount is small. The point is not. Many Cyprus buildings run on a flat monthly fee agreed years ago, collected without accounts and never entered in a register. This judgment shows what happens when such a fee is tested in court.

What happened

The owner paid for years, then stopped. The committee of the Beverly building had set a contribution of €17 a month to the building’s fund, which it said was decided at a meeting of the owners in December 2001. The owner paid it until late 2010 and then paid nothing until August 2014. The committee sued for €952 in the District Court of Nicosia, and the case was tried on affidavits under the fast-track procedure for small claims.

The owner said he had never been called to the meeting, had never agreed to the fee, and had asked again and again for statements of how the money was spent without receiving them.

Why the committee lost

The committee existed lawfully, but that was not enough. The trial court accepted that the committee had been properly formed and had the power to set up a fund and impose contributions. It held that having the power did not prove that the power had been used lawfully, and the Supreme Court agreed. Once the owner disputed the charge, the committee carried the burden of proving three things:

A lawful purpose. That the fund served the management, operation and upkeep of the common property. No accounts or other specific evidence of how the money was used were produced.
A lawful decision. That the contribution was decided in the way the Law requires. The committee said in its affidavit that the decision was unanimous and in its statement of claim that it was taken by majority, and the owner had not been invited to the meeting.
A lawful split. That each owner’s share followed the floor area of his unit, as section 38ΙΑ requires. The fee was the same €17 for every flat, whatever its size.

Paying for years did not bind the owner. The committee argued that eight years of payments amounted to an acknowledgement. The Court held that past payment is not a waiver of the right to challenge the charge later, does not cure defects in the way it was imposed, and is not by itself enough for an estoppel. A committee decision binds the owners only if it is lawful.

The owner’s rights to information did not shut out his defence. The committee said he could have inspected the register of decisions under section 38Λ, or asked for a certificate of his contributions under section 38ΚΗ(3). The Court held that those are tools for owners to obtain information and supervise the committee. They do not take away an owner’s right to contest, in court, a claim made against him.

The power to run a building fund is not proof that a particular charge was lawfully made. When an owner disputes it, the committee has to prove it.

The appeal was dismissed. Given the amount at stake, the Court limited the costs awarded to the owner to €300 plus VAT.

What the Law requires of a building fund

Every owner contributes, in proportion to floor area. Section 38ΙΑ(1) of the Immovable Property Law, Cap. 224, obliges all unit owners to share the costs of insuring, maintaining, repairing and managing the common property, with each owner’s share fixed by the regulations on the basis of the floor area of each unit. Section 38ΚΗ(1) lets the committee set up a fund it considers adequate, decide the amounts to be collected, and recover them by action.

The model regulations annexed to the Law add that the committee sends the owners a quarterly statement of the expenses of the previous three months and their nature. Here the absence of those statements, despite the owner’s requests, weighed against the committee.

What this means in practice

For a management committee: before you sue, make sure you can put three documents in front of the judge. The minutes of the meeting that set the fee, showing that every owner was called. A table splitting the fee by floor area. Statements showing what the money was spent on. If any of them is missing, put it right first: call a general meeting, set the contributions by area, enter the decision in the register, and send the quarterly statements. A flat fee for every flat is exactly what failed here.

For an owner who disputes the fee: ask in writing for the decision, the allocation and the accounts, and keep your letters, as this owner did. The trap is to think you may simply stop paying. The obligation to contribute is real, and a fee that was properly decided, fairly split and spent on the building will be recovered from you, with costs. The owner here won because the committee could not prove its case.

For a buyer: unpaid contributions can follow the flat. Under section 38ΚΗ(2) the owner at the time of the decision and the owner when the action is brought are jointly and severally liable. Before completion, ask the seller for the committee’s certificate of the amount due and the amount paid, and make the contract say who bears any arrears.

Our property lawyers advise committees and owners on building funds, regulations and disputes over contributions. For the wider framework, see our article on common expenses and communal areas, and on a related point, solar panels on a roof with exclusive use.

Questions we are asked

I stopped paying the monthly fee to my building. Am I safe?

Not automatically. Every unit owner must contribute to the costs of the common property under section 38ΙΑ of Cap. 224, and a charge that was decided properly, allocated by floor area and spent on the building can be recovered by action. The owner in this case won because the committee could not prove those things, not because he was entitled to stop paying. Ask in writing for the decision and the accounts first, and keep the replies.

Does paying for years mean I accepted the fee?

No. The Supreme Court held on 29 October 2026 that paying a charge for a period is not a waiver of the right to challenge it later, does not cure defects in how it was imposed, and does not by itself create an estoppel.

Can every flat in the building pay the same monthly amount?

The Law says the share of each owner is fixed by the regulations on the basis of the floor area of each unit. The trial court held that a flat €17 a month for every owner, whatever the size of the unit, ran against that rule, and the Supreme Court treated the allocation by area as one of the things the committee had to prove.

I am buying a flat, perhaps from abroad. Can unpaid fees of the seller follow me?

They can. Section 38ΚΗ(2) of Cap. 224 makes the owner at the time of the decision and the owner at the time the action is brought jointly and severally liable for a contribution. Before you complete, ask the seller for the committee’s certificate under section 38ΚΗ(3) of the amount due and the amount paid.

What should my first message say?

Whether you are an owner or on the committee, the name and town of the building, whether it has a registered Management Committee and regulations, the amount claimed and for which period, and what statements or minutes you have received. A copy of the demand or the claim form is enough to start.

Sources

Klitos Platis

Advocate, Partner

Kleanthous & Platis LLC, Cyprus
Published 31 October 2026

Need advice on your own matter?