South Africa: rental market overview

South Africa runs on a single national rental statute — the Rental Housing Act 50 of 1999 (RHA) — not a patchwork of state or provincial laws the way Australia or the United States uses. A second layer, the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA), adds extra protection whenever the tenant is a natural person (not a company), and Roman-Dutch common law fills whatever the statutes leave open. A long-signed amendment, the Rental Housing Amendment Act 35 of 2014, would make a written lease compulsory and add further protections, but as of 2026 it still hasn't been proclaimed into force — under the RHA as it currently stands, a lease doesn't have to be in writing, though a tenant can require the landlord to put it in writing on request (s.5(1)-(2)). Brokik always generates a full written agreement regardless, both because it's better practice and because it's ready for the day the Amendment Act finally commences.

Brokik's 61-clause template is built for a national lease — the same clauses apply whether the property is in Gauteng, the Western Cape or any other province, with only the contact details of the local Rental Housing Tribunal changing by province. Electronic signatures are valid for an ordinary residential lease under the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (ECTA); the Act only carves out the sale of land and leases longer than 20 years, both well outside the scope of a standard tenancy. No notary and no court registration are required. A separate flag in the template marks whether the tenant is a natural person or a company, since several of the strongest tenant protections — including the CPA rules covered below — only apply to natural persons.

There's no statutory ceiling on the security deposit — the Rental Housing Act simply lets landlord and tenant agree an amount (s.5(3)(c)); market practice is one to two months' rent, with two months more common for higher-risk tenancies. What sets South Africa apart from every other market Brokik operates in is section 5(3)(d): the deposit must be invested by the landlord in an interest-bearing account with a financial institution, and the landlord must pay the tenant interest at a rate no lower than that account's ordinary savings rate. The tenant can ask for written proof of the account and the interest earned at any time, and Brokik's template builds that obligation directly into the deposit clause rather than leaving it as a side promise.

Getting the deposit back depends on how the move-out went. If there are no deductions, the law requires a refund within 7 days of the lease ending. If a joint inspection took place and the landlord has documented deductions, the balance is due within 14 days of the tenant handing back the property. If the tenant simply doesn't respond to the landlord's invitation to the exit inspection, the landlord may inspect alone, and the balance is due within 21 days of the lease ending. Deductions can only cover tenant-caused damage and amounts owing — never fair wear and tear — and the tenant is entitled to receipts for any repair charged against the deposit.

Fixed-term leases are the default, but for a tenant who is a natural person the Consumer Protection Act caps them at 24 months (s.14) — a longer term is only possible if the tenant has expressly agreed to it and the landlord can show a demonstrable benefit to the tenant, which Brokik's template treats as the exception rather than something to route around. The same CPA provision gives that tenant an unusual right: they can cancel a fixed-term lease at any point, for any reason, on 20 business days' written notice, though the landlord may charge a reasonable early-termination penalty rather than the full remaining rent. A landlord who wants to end the lease early for the tenant's material breach must give the same 20 business days to fix the problem before cancelling. Where both landlord and tenant are companies, none of this CPA layer applies, and termination runs on the contract and common law alone — Brokik flags this distinction in the template.

Whatever the route to the lease ending, actually recovering the property is strictly a court matter. Under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act 19 of 1998 (PIE) and section 26(3) of the Constitution, no one may be evicted without a court order made after weighing 'all the relevant circumstances' — and self-help is flatly illegal: a landlord who changes the locks, removes a tenant's belongings or cuts off water or electricity to force them out is committing an unlawful eviction, not exercising a right. Brokik's template states this explicitly rather than implying the landlord has any self-help remedy. Month-to-month tenancies that follow on from an expired fixed term end on ordinary notice — one calendar month is the common-law default absent other agreement.

A joint inspection — landlord and tenant physically walking through the property together — isn't an optional nicety in South Africa; it carries statutory weight under section 5(3) of the Rental Housing Act. The law requires one before the tenant moves in, to record the property's condition, and another shortly before the lease ends (in practice, within about three days of expiry) to assess any damage. Brokik's protocol covers both: itemised room-by-room condition, fixtures, furniture and appliances, meter readings, and photographs, with both parties signing off.

Skipping either inspection carries a real penalty, not just a weaker negotiating position. If the landlord never carries out the move-in inspection, the property is legally deemed to have been in good condition when the tenant arrived. If the landlord fails to invite the tenant to the move-out inspection, the consequence is stronger still: the landlord loses the right to make any deduction at all, and must refund the full deposit plus accrued interest. Brokik treats the exit-inspection invitation as something worth a documented, timestamped record inside the platform — it's the single piece of evidence that protects a landlord's right to deduct anything from the deposit.

Two structural features sit outside the contract itself but shape how a South African tenancy actually runs. First, there's no national rent control for private residential leases — rent increases are a matter of market negotiation, and the near-universal way landlords handle them is a written escalation clause fixing an annual percentage increase, typically around 8% (with a wider historical range of roughly 6–10%). Brokik proposes an escalation clause as an optional field rather than a default, since it's market practice, not a legal requirement; without one, a rent change during a fixed term needs the tenant's agreement, and outside a fixed term, ordinary written notice. An unusually steep or aggressive increase can still be challenged as an 'unfair practice' before the Rental Housing Tribunal.

Second, an energy performance certificate is not required for residential lettings — the relevant regulations (Government Gazette 700 of 2020, SANS 1544) apply only to non-residential buildings over certain size thresholds, so Brokik's empty-state for this simply marks it as not applicable in South Africa. Rental income itself is taxed as ordinary income at South Africa's progressive personal rates (18–45% for the 2026 tax year), with mortgage interest, municipal rates, repairs, insurance, management fees and wear-and-tear on furnishings deductible against it (though capital improvements are not); a landlord whose taxable income combined with other passive income exceeds R30,000 a year generally needs to register as a provisional taxpayer. Rental of a dwelling is exempt from VAT. Disputes over any of this — deposits, unfair increases, harassment, unlawful lockouts — go to the free, lawyer-free Rental Housing Tribunal in the relevant province, whose ruling carries the same force as a magistrate's court judgment.