Body Corporate Law

When does Bad Neighbour Behaviour Become a Nuisance?

By: Cameron Chisholm, Body Corporate Lawyer

A recent Queensland Body Corporate decision, Palmhurst [2026] QBCCMCmr 88, offers a striking example of the challenges that can arise when one resident’s behaviour affects an entire community.

The facts were extraordinary. Residents complained of years of excessive noise, disruptive visitor behaviour, damage to common property, offensive odours and repeated police attendance. Evidence before the adjudicator included allegations of people living in the garage allocated as an exclusive use area to the lot, the garage later being used as a bicycle “chop shop”, stolen goods being traced to the property by police, rubbish being thrown from the balcony and cigarette butts, bottles and even used syringes being left on common property.

Whilst most Body Corporate disputes are unlikely to involve such extreme circumstances, the decision contains some useful guidance about nuisance and unreasonable interference that may apply to many Queensland community titles schemes.

Looking Beyond Individual Incidents

A notable feature of the decision was the adjudicator’s emphasis on the cumulative effect of the respondent’s conduct.

The adjudicator observed that:

“Not every incident referred to in and of itself necessarily constitutes a nuisance or an interference under the by-law. Considered collectively however … the respondent’s pattern of behaviour is causing a nuisance and is unreasonably interfering with the use and enjoyment of other lots and common property.”

That observation is important because many body corporate disputes involve repeated conduct rather than a single serious incident. Noise complaints, visitor issues, rubbish, parking disputes and misuse of common property may not individually justify significant intervention. However, Palmhurst confirms that adjudicators may look at the broader pattern of behaviour and its effect on the scheme as a whole.

The Standing Question

The adjudicator acknowledged previous authority suggesting that a Body Corporate does not generally have standing to pursue a private nuisance claim on behalf of individual owners affected in their lots. Traditionally, claims regarding nuisance have typically been pursued privately, with the affected owner being expected to pursue their own claim.

However, that creates an obvious difficulty where the conduct affects numerous residents across a scheme.

In Palmhurst, the adjudicator addressed that issue by considering whether the conduct was more appropriately characterised as a form of public nuisance.

The decision noted that a public nuisance is one that is: 

“… so widespread in its range or so indiscriminate in its effect that it would not be reasonable to expect one person to take proceedings on his own responsibility to put a stop to it, but that it should be taken on as a responsibility of the community at large.”

The adjudicator ultimately concluded that the Body Corporate had standing because the conduct affected multiple residents, much of the behaviour occurred on common property and the Body Corporate had itself incurred costs responding to the situation.

Why the Decision Matters

The facts in Palmhurst were undoubtedly extreme. Nevertheless, the decision may be of broader interest to Bodies Corporate dealing with conduct that affects large numbers of residents.

In particular, the decision suggests that where conduct causes widespread impacts across a scheme, an adjudicator may be willing to view the matter as something more than a conventional dispute between neighbouring owners. In those circumstances, a Body Corporate may have stronger grounds to pursue enforcement action than would ordinarily exist in a private nuisance context.

Whether future adjudicators adopt the same approach remains to be seen. However, Palmhurst is a useful reminder that nuisance complaints should not always be viewed incident-by-incident and that widespread, ongoing conduct affecting an entire community may raise issues extending beyond the rights of any one individual owner.

How We Can Help

If you are dealing with ongoing conduct that is affecting the enjoyment of lots or common property within your scheme, it is important to understand the enforcement options that may be available.

Our team regularly advises Bodies Corporate and lot owners alike on nuisance disputes, by-law enforcement, dispute resolution and adjudication proceedings. If you are experiencing ongoing issues within your scheme and would like advice about your rights or enforcement options, please contact our team.

Disclaimer: this article is provided for information purposes only and should not be regarded as legal advice.