Body corporate flooring rules in Queensland

In a Queensland apartment, start with the community management statement and the flooring or noise by-laws that apply to the scheme. A salesperson’s assurance that a floor suits apartments does not answer those requirements.

A useful application connects the proposed floor to the building: the exact layers, the acoustic evidence and the conditions under which the work will be carried out. Keep that record after approval.

Check the module named in your community management statement. This guide’s committee timelines and enforcement forms are for committee-based schemes. The Specified Two-lot Schemes Module uses a separate process.

Who sets the flooring rules in a Queensland body corporate?

If your building has a community titles scheme (CTS) number and a community management statement, it is governed by the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (the BCCM Act). The Act never mentions acoustic ratings, floor coverings or hard floors. Neither do the four 2020 regulation modules that sit under it. We searched the full text of each on 25 September 2026.

So the rules come from three places:

1. Your scheme’s by-laws. Section 168 of the Act says the by-laws are whatever appears under the heading “BY-LAWS” in your community management statement (CMS). Section 169 lets by-laws regulate, “including conditions applying to”, the use of lots. That is the power a hard-flooring by-law relies on.
2. Section 167, the nuisance rule. An occupier must not use a lot in a way that “causes a nuisance or hazard” or “interferes unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of another lot”. This applies whether or not your scheme has a flooring by-law.
3. Decisions. Adjudicators from the Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management (BCCM), and QCAT on appeal, decide what “reasonable” means for a particular building.

The Queensland Government’s own guidance puts it plainly: “putting hard floors (like timber or tiles) in a lot is the reason for many body corporate disputes. Because of this, some bodies corporate have by-laws which say owners need approval for changes to flooring” (qld.gov.au, Improving common property and lots).

To see your by-laws, get a copy of your CMS from Titles Queensland. The What by-laws apply page notes these copies are not available to order online.

What does the standard noise by-law say?

If your CMS lists no by-laws, the default set in schedule 4 of the Act applies (section 168(2)). For schemes created after July 1997, the Queensland Government notes there are “no other circumstances” where schedule 4 applies. By-law 1 reads:

“The occupier of a lot must not create noise likely to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of a person lawfully on another lot or the common property.”

Schedule 4 has 11 by-laws, and none of them deals with floor coverings or acoustic ratings. Older schemes created between 1980 and 1997 may still run on the schedule 3 by-laws of the Building Units and Group Titles Act 1980. Their noise by-law is worded much the same way. Adjudicators applied noise by-laws in this older wording in two of the tile cases below.

Do I need body corporate approval for a hard floor in Queensland?

It depends on your by-laws. If your scheme has a hard-flooring by-law, you need approval before you lay the floor. If it has none, the Queensland Government’s guidance still says to “consider how the change would affect others in the development, including neighbours”, because section 167 and any noise by-law still apply. In Beau Monde [2011] QBCCMCmr 548 the adjudicator noted that no provision or by-law required approval to change the flooring. The order still required the upstairs owner to put down rugs and, if needed, replace the tiles.

Two other rules can catch flooring work:

• Common property. If the work touches common property, the regulation module applies. Under section 187 of the Standard Module, the committee can approve an owner’s improvement to common property of $3,000 or less that does not spoil the building’s appearance. Anything larger needs an ordinary resolution at a general meeting. The Commercial Module (section 134) sets no value limit.
• Insurance. Section 202 of the Standard Module says an owner must tell the body corporate the nature and value of lot improvements that raise the standard of fixtures and are likely to push up the building insurance premium.

Who decides: the committee or a general meeting?

Section 100 of the Act makes a committee decision a decision of the body corporate, except on a “restricted issue”. The restricted issues are listed in section 52 of the Standard Module and include “changing rights, privileges or obligations of the owners”. In the decisions below, the committee decided individual flooring requests under the by-law. The owners in general meeting decide what the by-law says.

The committee cannot sit on your request forever. Section 58 of the Standard Module gives it 6 weeks to decide. It can give written notice of up to 6 more weeks. If it misses the deadline, your motion “is taken to be not agreed to”. The same periods appear in section 50 of the Accommodation Module, section 22 of the Commercial Module and section 19 of the Small Schemes Module. There is no deemed approval for flooring requests, unlike pet requests (sections 58A and 58B). If you need a general meeting instead, section 91 of the Standard Module requires at least 21 days’ notice.

Why does my by-law ask for FIIC, stars or L’nT,w?

Because Queensland flooring by-laws are written scheme by scheme, you will see different measures. In two of the three by-laws we read in the decisions, the figure came from an acoustic consultant’s advice to that body corporate. Here is how these measures have appeared in Queensland by-laws and orders. Each example comes from a decision summarised further down this page.

Two things matter when you read your by-law. First, FIIC and L’nT,w run in opposite directions, so “FIIC 65” and “L’nT,w 55” are not comparable without a consultant’s conversion. Second, the by-law figures above are field results measured in a real building. A lab figure (Ln,w or ΔLw) on a product data sheet is not the same thing; our acoustic ratings explained guide shows how they differ. A board that tests well in a laboratory can measure differently over your slab.

How do you get body corporate flooring approval in Queensland?

The steps below concern committee-based schemes and follow the Standard Module. They are not the approval process for a Specified Two-lot scheme; confirm that module’s decision process with the body corporate or a qualified adviser. Use the strata flooring checker to build your list of questions first.

1. Get your by-laws

   Get your community management statement from Titles Queensland or your body corporate manager. Find any by-law about hard floors, floor coverings, noise or alterations, and note its exact wording.

2. Ask the committee what it needs, in writing

   Ask which rating applies (L'nT,w, FIIC or stars), which rooms it applies to, and what evidence it will accept: an on-site test, a test from a building of the same construction and slab, or a product report.

3. Get acoustic evidence before you buy

   Engage an acoustic consultant to predict or test your proposed floor and underlay over your slab. Keep the report and the product specifications together.

4. Submit a written motion to the committee

   Give the secretary a written request with the floor system, rooms, installer and acoustic evidence. The committee has 6 weeks to decide, or up to 12 weeks if it gives written notice.

5. Get the approval and its conditions in writing

   Check the conditions: the rating to achieve, felt pads or rugs, inspection rights, and whether a test is needed after installation.

6. Install exactly what was approved

   Use the approved underlay and system. Keep invoices and a letter from the installer confirming the underlay and how it was installed.

7. Allow any inspection or test

   If the by-law or approval requires it, let a committee representative inspect, or arrange the test. Tell the body corporate about improvements that may affect insurance.

8. If refused, resolve it in order

   Talk to the committee first, then apply for BCCM conciliation, then adjudication. An appeal to QCAT is on a question of law only, within 6 weeks.

What have adjudicators and QCAT decided about hard floors?

Each dispute turns on its own building and evidence. QCAT said so itself in Admiralty Towers II: the many flooring decisions “are of limited assistance as each depends on its own facts”. The decisions below are examples from the evidence reviewed, rather than a complete history of flooring disputes.

The Republic Apartments [2022] QBCCMCmr 290 (adjudicator, 2022). An owner in an 89-lot Spring Hill tower wanted to replace living-area carpet with porcelain tiles on a 4.5mm rubber underlay, expected to reach about L’nT,w 61. The owners had adopted a new by-law by special resolution. It required L’nT,w 55 or lower, based on on-site testing, and let the committee approve other floors on satisfactory evidence. The adjudicator dismissed the owner’s challenge. The by-law was achievable and was not a prohibition, and the committee had already approved three hard-floor applications under it.

Body Corporate for Admiralty Towers II v Johnson [2017] QCATA 29 (QCAT appeal, 2017). The scheme’s by-law required floors to reach L’nT,w “not more than 45”, shown by a report from an acoustical consultant. An owner’s proposed oak floor tested at about 51. The adjudicator found the by-law unreasonable. QCAT set that order aside and sent the matter back. It held that the adjudicator had relied on an acoustics expert’s opinion about door heights and trip hazards that the expert was not qualified to give, and had overlooked test evidence that one system reached 45. We could not find the later outcome.

McLeod v Body Corporate for Stradbroke Tower and Villas [2015] QCATA 146 (QCAT appeal, 2015). The scheme’s by-law allowed approval conditions up to FIIC 77. The committee approved a timber floor on that condition. The adjudicator found FIIC 77 unachievable for any hard floor and substituted FIIC 65 “or equivalent”. The body corporate could require proof after installation and removal or rectification if the floor failed. QCAT dismissed the owner’s appeal. It said the Building Code “does not set levels for the purposes of good neighbourly relations”.

18 Kingsford Street [2016] QBCCMCmr 78 (adjudicator, 2016). Carpet in a five-lot building was replaced with porcelain tiles with no acoustic underlay. Field tests measured L’nT,w 75 to 80. The body corporate had issued a continuing contravention notice under its noise by-law. The adjudicator found a breach of section 167 and ordered the owners, within three months, to cover the tiles with carpet and underlay, replace them, or re-lay tiles over an acoustic membrane.

Into Ballymore [2012] QBCCMCmr 166 (adjudicator, 2012). The owner below brought an acoustic report measuring the tiled areas above at L’nT,w 76. The adjudicator found the floor so poor that normal use would interfere unreasonably. The order required new flooring over “a high quality acoustic underlay” within two months, plus an installer’s letter confirming the underlay. The adjudicator refused the neighbour’s claim for the cost of the report.

Beau Monde [2011] QBCCMCmr 548 (adjudicator, 2011). An earlier conciliated agreement about felt pads and footwear had not ended a dispute over tiles laid years before. After a joint acoustic inspection, the adjudicator treated the Building Code figure as an objective guide and ordered rugs within 30 days and, within six months, whatever further steps were needed, including new tiles or carpet.

The 18 Kingsford Street, Into Ballymore and Beau Monde orders all applied the test from Norbury v Hogan [2010] QCATA 27, a smoke case. Under that test, a nuisance must be “of such volume or frequency that it would interfere unreasonably with the life of another lot owner of ordinary sensitivity”. That is why objective acoustic test results carry so much weight.

What happens if you do not comply?

The notice and committee steps in the next two paragraphs concern committee-based schemes. Under the Specified Two-lot Schemes Module, owners use a different enforcement process: the Queensland Government identifies owner notices on forms 27 and 28, and an occupier notice on form 25. There is no committee route. Follow the specific two-lot enforcement guidance instead of the forms below.

If the body corporate believes you are breaching a by-law, it can give you a continuing contravention notice (BCCM form 10). This notice tells you to fix the problem within a reasonable time. For a breach likely to be repeated, it can give a future contravention notice (form 11), which lasts up to 3 months. Sections 182 and 183 of the Act set a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units for not complying. After a notice, the body corporate can prosecute in the Magistrates Court or apply for conciliation (qld.gov.au, Enforcing by-laws). In most cases it must give the notice before it can apply (section 184).

A neighbour who is affected gives the committee a BCCM form 1. The committee then has 14 days to say whether it has issued a notice. If it has not, the neighbour can apply for conciliation, but must first try to sort it out with you.

If conciliation fails, the next step is adjudication. Under section 276, an adjudicator can make any order that is “just and equitable”, including an order to act in a stated way. In the decisions above, that meant carpet, rugs or re-laying over acoustic underlay within set times. Breaching an adjudicator’s order is an offence with a maximum of 400 penalty units (section 288).

Who tests after installation, and who pays?

No Queensland rule says who must test or who pays. It depends on your by-law, your approval conditions and any order:

• Owner proves it on request. In McLeod, the order let the body corporate require the owner to demonstrate FIIC 65 “or equivalent”.
• Inspect first, test only on concern. The Republic Apartments by-law allowed a committee inspection. A test was required only if there were reasonable concerns and the committee reasonably asked.
• Installer confirmation. Into Ballymore required a letter from the flooring installer rather than a test.
• Joint testing in disputes. In Beau Monde the parties arranged a joint inspection at the adjudicator’s invitation. QCAT suggested a joint experts’ report in Admiralty Towers II.

On cost, the Into Ballymore adjudicator described adjudication as “an informal and low cost jurisdiction” with no power in that case to order the other owner to pay for the neighbour’s acoustic report. Budget for your own testing, and agree in writing before installation who pays for any test the committee may ask for later.

For the floor types and underlays most likely to pass a strict by-law, read best flooring for apartments.