DISPUTE MANAGEMENT – NEVER WRESTLE WITH PIGS

There’s an old saying: “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty – and the pig likes it.”

In strata, some disputes feel exactly like that. A committee finds itself drawn into endless arguments with an owner (or another committee member) who seems more interested in “winning” or venting than in resolving an issue. The result is time, cost and stress for everyone – and very little progress.

This article uses that analogy to explore why committees should avoid “Never Wrestle with Pigs” and instead rely on the legislative framework for bodies corporate to manage unreasonable or nuisance behaviour constructively.

What the Pig Analogy Really Means in Strata

The “pig” in this context is not a person – it is the dynamic of an unproductive fight:

• Repetitive, aggressive or accusatory emails.
• Personal attacks at meetings.
• Point-scoring between committee members.
• Demands for immediate responses on non-urgent matters.

The Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management has had many disputes lodged with their office. At heart of these disputes is the result of poor communication and not just the underlying issue like noise, maintenance or by-laws.

If a committee responds to every provocative email or remark in the same tone these communications are received, the “wrestling match” escalates. Instead, the legislation provides committees with tools to step out of the mud and deal with behaviour in a constructive way.

The Queensland Framework: What Committees Must (and Don’t Have to) Do

A few key points from the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCM Act) and Regulations:

• No general duty to answer every email
  The Commissioner’s “Body corporate communications” article notes that body corporate legislation does not require a committee to respond to all correspondence from residents. Where time permits, a simple acknowledgment can be helpful, but volunteers are not expected to spend unlimited time replying to every message.
• Committee must act reasonably
  When making decisions, the committee must act reasonably in the circumstances. That includes how it chooses to deal with correspondence and complaints – for example, deciding to prioritise formal motions over long email chains.
• Nuisance and unreasonable interference (section 167)
  Section 167 BCCM Act prohibits using a lot or common property in a way that causes a nuisance or unreasonably interferes with others’ use and enjoyment. While this is often applied to noise or smoking, it can also be relevant when conduct (including communications) crosses the line into harassment or nuisance.
• Code of Conduct for committee voting members
  Committee members must understand and comply with the BCCM Act and code of conduct, act honestly and fairly, not cause a nuisance on scheme land and disclose conflicts of interest.

The upshot: you can be firm, structured and reasonable, without being drawn into personal fights.

Why You Shouldn’t “Fight for Sport”

Engaging in tit-for-tat exchanges carries real risks:

• Personal liability and bullying claims
  Prior articles published on bullying claims, highlight that conduct like repeated, sarcastic or late-night emails from a committee chair to a caretaker was found to be bullying in the Fair Work Commission, resulting in orders limiting how and when emails could be sent.
• Escalation into formal disputes
  The Commissioner’s office has publicised that once issues escalate into formal applications, relationships become harder to repair and time, and emotional costs increase for everyone.
• Committee dysfunction
  Where conflict is between committee members themselves, communication style becomes crucial. We suggest emphasising that different personalities and communication preferences require calm, neutral and empathetic language – especially in high-tension situations avoids ongoing division.

In short: defending every slight or accusation is rarely worth the damage it does to governance and wellbeing.

Using By-Laws and Orders Instead of Arguments

1. Communication by-laws

Because the legislation does not specifically regulate day-to-day communication, many schemes now adopt communication by-laws. The Commissioner’s “Body corporate communications” article gives an example from Tank Tower [2015] QBCCMCmr 322, where the by-law required owners and occupiers to communicate with the committee “in a reasonable manner and not in any way which may become an annoyance or a nuisance”.

The adjudicator in Tank Tower held that it was entirely appropriate to expect communications to be reasonable, respectful and not a nuisance, and found that the owner’s volume and abusive content breached the by-law.

In another decision, Archer Hill [2025] QBCCMCmr 267, a lot owner sent more than 300 emails over two years, some in all capitals with phrases like “STILL WAITING” and “I DEMAND”. A communication by-law allowed the committee to set conditions on correspondence. The referee upheld the by-law and imposed limits such as one written communication per week (maximum two pages or 1,000 words), while rejecting overly restrictive conditions like “post only” as disproportionate.

These cases show that good communication by-laws can give committees a solid basis to manage unreasonable correspondence without slogging through every hostile email.

2. Nuisance correspondence and enforcement steps

Smart Strata’s How to deal with nuisance correspondence article explains that while section 167 (general nuisance) can be hard to apply to emails, a purpose-built communication by-law is usually more effective. In Tank Tower, orders included limiting the owner to one written communication per week, capped at two pages/1,000 words, and requiring courteous language.

The usual path is:

1. Ensure you have a valid communication by-law (consistent with section 180 of the BCCM Act).
2. Issue a by-law contravention notice, giving the owner a chance to comply.
3. If behaviour continues, use conciliation through the BCCM Office.
4. As a last resort, apply for adjudicators or referee’s orders. Past decisions are publicly available via AustLII and the BCCM website and can guide expectations.

Practical Strategies for Committees: How Not to Wrestle

Here are some concrete strategies committees can adopt that stay firmly within the legislative framework.

1. Set an internal behaviour and communication charter

When required, we recommend that committees adopt a “behaviour and communication charter” that:

• • Confirms no committee member may verbally or physically abuse another
  • Prohibits insulting or defamatory statements in written communications
  • Clarifies which channels (email, meetings, portals) are used for what purpose
  • Sets expectations around response times and business hours.

This can be adopted as a committee resolution and, if appropriate, reflected in by-laws or an information sheet circulated to owners.

2. Acknowledge, then redirect to process

Given there is no statutory duty to respond to every complaint email, committees can:

• • Send a short acknowledgment (“Your email has been received and will be considered in accordance with the scheme’s processes”)
  • Ask the owner to submit a formal motion if they want a decision – which must then be decided within the statutory decision period.

This keeps discussion within proper channels and avoids endless back-and-forth.

3. Use internal dispute resolution where possible

The Commissioner encourages internal dispute resolution processes such as mediation, informal meetings or nominating a single committee contact to manage concerns.

For example:

• • A short, structured meeting with clear ground rules (time limit, no interruptions, focus on issues not personalities)
  • A follow-up written summary of outcomes, so there is a record if the matter escalates.

4. Draw a clear line on abuse

Guidance on nuisances and hazards recognises that bullying or harassment may also engage workplace health and safety obligations where contractors or employees are involved.

Committees should:

• • Make it clear that abusive, threatening or discriminatory behaviour will not be tolerated
  • Keep records of incidents (emails, meeting notes)
  • Where appropriate, consider anti-bullying or WHS obligations, especially in dealings with caretakers, managers and other workers, as highlighted in this bullying article.

Stepping back from a hostile exchange does not mean ignoring the issue – it means dealing with it through the right legal and procedural pathways.

5. Manage conflict within the committee

When the “pig” is actually an internal conflict between committee members:

• • Re-focus on the Code of Conduct, including acting in the best interests of the body corporate and not causing a nuisance.
  • Use adapted communication styles – calm, neutral language and the right level of detail – to avoid triggering defensiveness.
  • Consider an independent chair for contentious meetings, or external facilitation for entrenched disputes.

Turning Down the Temperature – and Staying Out of the Mud

The message for committees is simple:

• You don’t have to wrestle.
• You do have to act reasonably, follow the BCCM Act and code of conduct, and use the tools available – by-laws, internal processes, conciliation and, if needed, adjudicator’s orders.
• Clear communication rules protect everyone: owners, committee members, contractors and managers.

Handled well, even the most persistent “keyboard warrior” becomes a compliance problem to be managed, not a personal battle to be fought.

And that is how committees can stay clean – and leave the mud wrestling to the metaphors.

Article Contributed by Grant Mifsud, Partner – Archers the Strata Professionals.