Question: Owners are being warned that going back to dispute resolution risks a costs order. Does that mean the low-cost dispute pathway isn’t really low-cost or low-risk?
I’m aware of owners being warned that returning to the tribunal risks a punitive costs order. That pushes them away from the very forum that’s meant to resolve these disputes cheaply.
Is that a sign the low-cost dispute pathway isn’t actually low-cost or low-risk in practice? And if so, what would fix it?
Answer: Costs can only be awarded when an application is dismissed as frivolous, misconceived or vexatious, and adjudicators rarely award them on a first application.
By ‘tribunal’, we assume you mean the Commissioner’s Office. The Commissioner’s Office is not a tribunal. It’s an important distinction, and it’s important to use terminology correctly too.
Your query seems to be referring to the ability of an adjudicator in the Commissioner’s Office to award costs. The legislation makes plain that the ability to award costs is linked to an application being dismissed as frivolous, misconceived or vexatious. In practice, adjudicators rarely, if ever, award costs on an applicant’s first application and are at pains to caution (‘warn’, in your words) that the costs may be awarded in future. Why shouldn’t someone bear costs if they get a caution but still proceed to prepare a frivolous, misconceived or vexatious application? It’s a big waste of time and public resources.
There’s no doubt the current dispute resolution processes need reform. The Commissioner’s Office is nearly always under the pump given the demand on its services, which means long wait times for outcomes. That needs to change, and that’s a resourcing issue for government. Several aspects of the Chapter 6 legislative provisions would benefit from review and constructive reform. We’re firmly of the view that legislation should be changed to increase or remove the cap on the costs order altogether, and that provisions should be introduced to be able to declare a party vexatious. This might dissuade many trivial and unnecessary matters that add to wait times.
The best dispute resolution method in strata remains, in our view, dispute prevention: take all the necessary and reasonable steps to stop a dispute occurring or escalating. That way, one never has to worry about costs orders, whether punitive or not.
This is general information only and not legal advice.
This post appears in the November 2026 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Chris Irons Strata Solve E: chris@stratasolve.com.au P: 0419 805 898
