Question: Children on e-scooters and e-bikes zoom around the complex at speeds exceeding our 10km/hour speed limit. Should we change signage to include e-scooters and e-bikes as part of the 10km speed limit, or what should we do?
Answer: Use of e-scooters and bikes by children on scheme land may amount to a ‘hazard’ depending on the relevant circumstances.
Generally, bodies corporate cannot enforce arbitrary speed limits unless the body corporate has sufficient evidence to justify the imposition of a particular speed. The adjudicator in Canterbury & Westminster [2008] QBCCMCmr 234 relevantly provided:
“I am of the view that any specific’ speed limit’ which the Body Corporate may set would be advisory only and not able to be strictly enforced. However, if the speed or any other aspect of the manner of a person’s driving on common property was dangerous or otherwise could be shown to cause an unreasonable interference to the lawful use of the common property, that activity would amount to a breach of the Act.”
Accordingly, a body corporate cannot enforce a speed limit of 10km per hour unless the body corporate can provide evidence to justify the imposition of this specific speed limit, usually through a health and safety report.
The dangerous operation of personal mobility devices (such as e-scooters and bikes) may be more appropriately regulated by Section 167 of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld) (BCCMA) which provides occupiers must not use, or permit the use of a lot in the scheme or the common property in a manner that causes a ‘hazard’. Depending on the construction of the scheme’s by-laws, this legislative obligation may be contained in the by-laws for the scheme and may constitute a breach of the by-laws.
What is determined to be a ‘hazard’ is determined on a case-by-case basis, taking into account all relevant circumstances (noting the BCCMA does not define ‘hazard’). The adjudicator in Dewsbury Park [2023] QBCCMCmr 297 relevantly provided:
“In the case of Mirana Investments Pty Ltd and Ors v Coupe, QCAT grappled with the question of whether the respondent was in breach of section 167 of the Act by using his lot in a way that caused a nuisance or hazard. QCAT found the term ‘hazard’ is a non-technical term that “…plainly relates to situations with a potential for harm which has not yet occurred.” It referred to Macquarie Dictionary definitions for the word as:
- A risk; exposure to danger or harm
- The cause of such a risk; a potential source of harm, injury, difficulty.”
Accordingly, use of e-scooters and bikes by children on scheme land may amount to a ‘hazard’ depending on the relevant circumstances.
This post appears in the July 2025 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Todd Garsden
Mahoneys
E: tgarsden@mahoneys.com.au
P: 07 3007 3753
I live in a complex in FNQ which unfortunately no longer has a gate or boomgate however traffic using the (private) road as a short-cut to a Street off our road are constantly speeding through at a speed far above the maximum of 20kph. Pedistrians including children use the road and at times unaccompanied by adults. The road has speed humps which it would seem have no affect, particularly as many of the vehicles seem to be large 4wd’s. I would, as a concerned resident, appreciate any feedback you could offer. Could police be involved in traffic control in this instance.
Thank you in advance
Ms Lee Avenir
This response from Chris Irons, Hynes Legal:
Thanks for your comment Lee. You can certainly get the police involved if there is a threat to someone’s safety. I’m not sure if they would have the relevant enforcement powers, but there is no harm in asking.
You say there is no longer a gate or boomgate. I presume that means there once was and this problem didn’t occur then? If so then it maybe time to think about getting one or both of those things reinstalled. If you’re an owner you can propose motions for the body corporate to consider at a general meeting and you can obtain quotes for that work. If you think money is going to be an issue for the body corporate, then that is understandable, but perhaps it would be good for other owners to think about the alternative of someone getting injured – or worse – if those things were not in place. No harm in you making that point to other owners.
It may pay to read the development approval given by council. In a scheme that I lived in on the Gold Coast the council specified maximum speed limits for certain roads in that development. What happens if they are breached – I do not know.