Can your strata scheme stop you short-term renting?

The principle that runs through most of it

Two ideas explain nearly every rule on this page. The first is that legislatures have been willing to let neighbours vote to keep investors out of a building, but not to let them vote a resident out of their own home. The second is that where a state has no explicit short-stay power, schemes have reached the same outcome through a minimum letting term, which bans short stays without ever using the word.

So the practical question is rarely 'can they ban it'. It is 'is this lot my principal place of residence, and if not, what majority do my neighbours need'.

New South Wales: yes for investment lots, never for your home

Section 137A of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 lets a scheme make a by-law by special resolution prohibiting a lot being used for a short-term rental accommodation arrangement. The power is limited: it only reaches lots that are not the principal place of residence of the person granting occupancy.

The protection is expressed strongly. Where the lot is the host's principal place of residence, such a by-law is of no force or effect to that extent. An owner-occupier can let a spare room, or the whole home while temporarily away, and the scheme cannot stop them.

Practically, that splits apartment stock in two. An investment unit in a scheme with a s137A by-law is not a short-stay asset, whatever the planning rules say. An owner-occupied unit in the same building still is.

• Requires a special resolution, which in NSW strata means no more than 25% of votes against.
• Reaches non-principal-place-of-residence lots only.
• Hosts in strata also have Code of Conduct obligations to notify the owners corporation and neighbours.

Sources: Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW), s137A

Victoria: 75% of owners, and the same protection for residents

Victoria arrived at nearly the same place by a different route. The Short Stay Levy Act 2024 amended the Owners Corporations Act 2006 so that from 1 January 2025 an owners corporation may make a rule prohibiting lots being used for short-stay accommodation.

The threshold is a special resolution: 75% of lot owners in favour, or 75% of votes by lot entitlement where it goes to a ballot or poll. As in New South Wales, the ban cannot apply to a lot that is the owner's or occupier's principal place of residence.

One caveat worth stating because other sites carry it as fact: we have seen an 'interim resolution' pathway described, at 50% in favour with no more than 25% against. We could not verify that on Consumer Affairs Victoria's own page, which discusses only the special-resolution route, so we do not assert it.

Sources: Consumer Affairs Victoria, making rules to ban short-stay accommodation

Queensland: the one where a ban is probably beyond power

This is where most guides get it backwards, and it is worth reading carefully because the money at stake in Queensland holiday-letting buildings is significant.

Section 180(3) of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 says, in terms: 'If a lot may lawfully be used for residential purposes, the by-laws can not restrict the type of residential use.' The Queensland Government's own by-laws page says the same thing in plain language, listing 'restrict the type of residential use of a residential lot' among the things a by-law cannot do.

So everything turns on whether short-term letting counts as a type of residential use. In Body Corporate for Hilton Park CTS 27490 v Robertson [2018] QCATA 168 the appeal tribunal held that it does. It threw out a motion that would have allowed letting only on agreements of six months or more, finding at [74] that the legislature intended 'residential' to include holiday letting and short-term accommodation.

Being straight about how far that goes: it is one appeal decision from 2018, not a line of authority, and no government page says in terms that short-stay bans are unlawful. Treat a ban as very likely invalid and worth challenging, rather than as settled. If your scheme has one, get advice before you accept it.

The case usually cited the other way, Redman v The Proprietors - Fairway Island, upheld a one-month minimum letting period, but that scheme was under the Building Units and Group Titles Act rather than the BCCM Act, so it does not govern BCCM schemes. Check which Act yours is under.

A body corporate in Queensland is not powerless. It can enforce genuine behavioural by-laws about noise, nuisance, parking and common property. What it cannot do, on the authority as it stands, is prohibit the letting itself.

Sources: Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld), s 180, Queensland Government, making by-laws, Hilton Park CTS 27490 v Robertson [2018] QCATA 168, Redman v Fairway Island GTP 107328 [2020] QDC 68

Western Australia: the by-law beats your state registration

Western Australia handles it through the registration scheme rather than the strata Act. Under the Short-Term Rental Accommodation Regulations 2024, an application to join the state STRA Register must disclose whether the premises are in a strata or community titles scheme and whether the scheme by-laws prohibit STRA use.

If the by-laws do prohibit it, the Commissioner may suspend or cancel that property's registration on that ground. In other words, being on the state register does not override your scheme. The by-law wins, and the state will act on it.

Sources: Short-Term Rental Accommodation Regulations 2024 (WA), regs 7 and 12

Tasmania and South Australia: the minimum letting term

Neither state has a purpose-built short-stay ban power, and both get to the same result through a minimum term.

In Tasmania, section 91(2) of the Strata Titles Act 1998 lets a body corporate make a by-law imposing a minimum letting term of up to six months on lots in the scheme. Short-stay letting is by definition shorter than that, so such a by-law operates as a complete exclusion without ever naming Airbnb.

South Australia works the same way with a shorter clock. Section 37(2)(a) of the Community Titles Act 1996 allows a corporation, by special resolution, to adopt a by-law prohibiting or restricting an owner from leasing a lot for less than two months. The City of Adelaide's own submission to the state inquiry describes strata powers in South Australia as limited, so treat the broader position as less settled than the two-month provision itself.

In Tasmania there is a second, planning-side sting. A dwelling that is part of a strata title arrangement including another dwelling does not qualify for Hobart's simpler permitted planning pathway, and instead needs full discretionary approval, which is the $5,000 application rather than the $250 one.

Sources: Strata Titles Act 1998 (Tas), s91(2), South Australian Law Handbook on Community Titles Act 1996 s37(2)(a)

ACT and Northern Territory

The ACT does not have a dedicated short-stay by-law power either. What it has is default rule 1.11 of the Unit Titles (Management) Regulation 2011, 'Illegal use of unit', which states that a unit owner must not use the unit, or permit it to be used, to contravene a law in force in the ACT. That gives an owners corporation a route to act where the letting is already unlawful under planning or the Crown lease, and many residential unit Crown leases are restricted to single dwelling residential use.

In the Northern Territory, section 95 of the Unit Title Schemes Act 2009 lets a scheme statement specify its own by-laws, but section 95(3) invalidates a by-law to the extent it unlawfully restricts the use of a unit. Whether an outright short-stay ban would survive that limit has not, as far as we can find, been settled, so we do not claim it either way.

Sources: Unit Titles (Management) Regulation 2011 (ACT), Schedule 1 default rule 1.11, Unit Title Schemes Act 2009 (NT), s95

What to actually do before you buy or list

The check is quick and it is cheaper than the mistake.

• Get the current consolidated by-laws, not the developer's original set. Schemes amend them, and the version attached to an old contract is often stale.
• Search for the concepts, not the word 'Airbnb'. A minimum letting term, a restriction on 'short-term accommodation', or a use clause naming residential purposes will all bite.
• Establish whether the lot is, or will be, your principal place of residence. In New South Wales and Victoria that single fact decides whether a ban can reach you at all.
• Check the minutes for a motion in progress. A scheme that is about to vote is a different risk from one that has not thought about it.
• If you are in Queensland and the scheme has a letting ban, get advice before accepting it. The tribunal authority suggests it may not be enforceable.

Common questions

Related

• New South Wales state framework
• Victoria state framework
• Queensland state framework
• Check what applies at a postcode