A personal approach
to body corporate management
That’s why we take the time to listen, tailoring our management approach to suit every person, their communication style and business preferences.
Receive an obligation
free proposal
Please contact us here if you are seeking a proposal for a building we don’t currently manage. If you are an existing BCsystems customer please email us at info@bcsystems.com.au
When it comes to body corporate living, few topics cause more debate than trees, especially when they straddle the line between common property and exclusive use areas.
Large plants and their roots can add shade and amenity, but they also bring risk – damage to pipes, stormwater systems, paving, and even personal safety if branches or fronds fall.
So who is responsible for their maintenance and liability?
Exclusive-Use Areas
The Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCM Act) makes clear that the body corporate must maintain common property in good condition. However, where an area of common property is allocated as exclusive use to a lot, the maintenance obligations generally shift to the lot owner, unless the by-laws specify otherwise.
That means if a large tree sits within your courtyard under an exclusive use by-law, you will often be considered the ‘tree keeper’ under the Neighbourhood Disputes (Dividing Fences and Trees) Act 2011. This carries both the duty to maintain the tree and liability for any damage it causes.
In practice, this means that even if a tree is large, costly to prune, or subject to a council protection order, the responsibility for maintaining it may still sit with the lot owner if it is within their exclusive-use area. For example, a courtyard palm that drops fronds into neighbouring areas would usually be the owner’s responsibility to manage, not the body corporate’s.
Development approvals and protected trees
Sometimes, trees aren’t just a landscaping choice, they’re a legal requirement. When a development is first approved, councils often impose conditions that certain trees must be planted or preserved. These can include large, long-living species like figs, palms, or gums.
Because these conditions form part of the original approval for the scheme, they apply to the land itself and don’t disappear simply because the property changes hands. In other words, the responsibility to preserve or maintain those trees sits with the body corporate as the landowner, unless the Community Management Statement (CMS) and by-laws very clearly transfer that responsibility to lot owners.
For example, if a council required a row of mature palms to be retained as part of the scheme’s streetscape, the body corporate can’t simply pass the responsibility for those palms to an adjoining owner with an exclusive use courtyard, unless the by-laws expressly say so.
For prospective buyers, this makes due diligence important.
If you’re considering purchasing a lot in a scheme with large or protected trees, your solicitor should check council records for tree preservation orders, landscaping plans, or development approval conditions. Otherwise, you could find yourself responsible for the upkeep or risk management of a tree you didn’t expect.
Risk and removal decisions
Large trees and plants can become a source of concern when they start to interfere with buildings, utilities, or safety. Overhanging branches, invasive root systems, falling debris, or even the potential for a tree to topple in storms often raise the question: who decides if a tree should be pruned, reduced, or removed?
- On common property (not subject to exclusive use): The body corporate is responsible for assessing the risk, making decisions about maintenance or removal, and covering the costs.
- Within exclusive use areas: The lot owner usually bears responsibility, unless the scheme’s by-laws say otherwise. This includes the cost of pruning, treatment, or removal.
In either case, council approval may be required if the tree is protected under local laws.
To avoid disputes, decisions should be guided by experts like an arborist, rather than personal opinions. This ensures that any action taken is reasonable, defensible, and compliant with both by-laws and council requirements.
Roots, pipes and damage claims
Tree roots are a frequent cause of disputes. If roots from a tree on common property damage an owner’s exclusive use courtyard, the body corporate may be liable for rectification, as the tree is its responsibility.
Conversely, if a tree inside an exclusive-use area damages common property infrastructure, the owner may bear the cost.
Again, the ‘tree keeper’ principle under the Neighbourhood Disputes Act is the guide: the person or entity responsible for the land where the tree sits is responsible for the tree and its impacts.
In Summary
- Check the CMS and exclusive use by-laws – they determine responsibility more than anything else.
- Don’t assume fences equal boundaries – rely on the plans, not the physical markers.
- Development approvals matter – protected or mandated trees often remain a body corporate responsibility.
- Responsibility follows the ‘tree keeper’ – if the tree is on land you own or control, it’s usually yours to maintain.
- Use experts for safety assessments – arborist reports carry more weight than opinions.
Large trees add beauty and character, but they can also bring financial and legal headaches.
The best defence is knowledge. Know your boundaries, know your by-laws, and know your responsibilities before disputes arise.
Related content
Share This Post
Subscribe To Our Newsletter
More To Explore
Balconies in a Body Corporate: Who is Responsible for Repairs and Maintenance
In this article, we explore the common issues that affect balconies and decks and explain who is generally responsible for repairs and maintenance, depending on whether your property is registered under a Building Format Plan (BFP) or a Standard Format Plan (SFP).
7 Reasons to Live in a Body Corporate Community
Whether in a townhouse complex, apartment building, or mixed-use development, body corporate living combines convenience, shared management, and a sense of community that traditional home ownership doesn’t always provide.