Property practitioners will not be required to submit BEE certificates to renew their operating certificates before the 31 October deadline, the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority (PPRA) has confirmed.
The clarification follows an 8 September Pretoria High Court judgment that found the requirement for a valid black economic empowerment certificate as a condition for obtaining a Fidelity Fund Certificate (FFC) to be unconstitutional. The ruling was secured by business organisation Sakeliga and has immediate implications for practitioners who need to remain authorised to operate in the property market.
PPRA chief executive Thato Ramaili said the regulator would comply with the judgment while the broader legal process continued. “The BEE ruling still awaits Constitutional Court confirmation, and until it does, no applicant will be refused an FFC solely for lacking that certificate,” Ramaili said.
What the ruling means for practitioners
An FFC is central to a property practitioner’s ability to operate under the regulatory framework. The PPRA’s position means that the absence of a BEE certificate, by itself, will not prevent an applicant from obtaining or renewing the document while the court proceedings remain unresolved.
The practical priority for practitioners is therefore the 31 October renewal deadline. The regulator’s announcement removes one specific compliance obstacle, but it does not amount to a general suspension of the Property Practitioners Act or its other requirements. The PPRA said the judgment did not set aside BEE legislation generally.
| Issue | Current position |
|---|---|
| BEE certificate and FFC | An applicant may not be refused an FFC solely for lacking a BEE certificate |
| Renewal deadline | 31 October |
| Legal status | The High Court ruling remains subject to Constitutional Court proceedings |
| Broader transformation policy | The PPRA says its programme will continue |
Transformation programme remains in place
Ramaili said the judgment would not slow the PPRA’s transformation agenda. The authority is a statutory regulator responsible for overseeing property practitioners, protecting consumers and advancing transformation in the sector.
Its reported progress includes 1 656 candidates placed through the One Learner, One Property Practitioner programme. That is against a target of 2 500 placements by 2029. The initiative is intended to widen access to the industry by providing a route into property practice.
A further 844 practitioners had enrolled in the authority’s principalisation programme. That programme is designed to assist qualified estate agents who want to become principals and operate their own property firms. The PPRA also said it met two of its three transformation targets during the 2025/26 period, although participation in its new youth programme declined by 28%.
Constitutional Court proceedings ahead
The legal position is not yet final. Sakeliga has taken the matter to the Constitutional Court, asking it to confirm the finding concerning BEE certificates and challenging parts of the High Court judgment. Its appeal also seeks a narrower interpretation of who qualifies as a property practitioner under the Property Practitioners Act.
The dispute centres partly on the breadth of the Act’s definition. Sakeliga argues that, on an ordinary reading, it could cover people involved in activities ranging from property sales and financing to advertising. The High Court declared part of the definition unconstitutional, while the organisation is seeking further changes through the appeal process.
For now, the PPRA’s position creates a distinction between operational access to an FFC and the regulator’s longer-term transformation objectives. Practitioners must still meet the applicable regulatory requirements, but the lack of a BEE certificate alone cannot be used to block their renewal while the Constitutional Court considers the case.
