The common types of property dispute
- Building and construction disputes. The largest category — between homeowners and builders, builders and subcontractors, and developers and contractors. Usual flashpoints: defective work, delays, cost overruns, disputed variations, and disagreements about whether work meets the contract or relevant standards. Because they often turn on technical questions, they can become a battle of expert reports, which is exactly what makes litigating them so costly.
- Boundary and fencing disputes. Encroachments, dividing-fence cost-sharing, and access disputes between neighbours. These are frequently more about relationship and principle than money — which is precisely why a purely legal approach so often fails to actually resolve them.
- Co-ownership disputes. Siblings who inherited a house, friends who invested together, or a couple who have separated and cannot agree on whether to sell, how to manage the property, or how to divide the proceeds. A court can ultimately order a sale, but that is a slow and blunt outcome.
- Strata and owners-corporation disputes. Conflicts between lot owners or between owners and the body corporate over levies, by-laws, common property, and building defects. These have their own tribunal pathways and are covered in more depth in our strata and neighbour dispute guidance.
- Off-the-plan and sale disputes. Disagreements over whether the finished product matches what was promised, delayed settlements, and disputes about deposits.
Why property disputes are so well suited to mediation
- They are fact-heavy and expert-driven. Litigating a construction defect means duelling expert reports, site inspections and technical argument — slow and expensive. Mediation lets the parties agree a practical path (an agreed scope of rectification, for instance) without paying two experts to fight it out.
- The relationship often continues. Neighbours remain neighbours. Co-owners may still be family. A body corporate and its lot owners have to keep living together. A judgment does not repair that; a negotiated agreement can.
- The outcomes people actually want are practical, not just financial. What an owner usually wants is the defect fixed, or the fence agreed, or the property sold on sensible terms. Mediation can deliver a works schedule, a timeline, a cost-sharing arrangement or a buy-out. A court generally cannot.
- Speed matters. Building disputes in particular get worse with time — defects deteriorate, costs rise, and positions harden. A tribunal matter can take many months just to reach a first hearing. Mediation can be arranged and resolved far faster.
The formal pathways — and where mediation fits
State civil and administrative tribunals — NCAT in NSW, VCAT in Victoria, QCAT in Queensland — handle a large share of building, strata and tenancy disputes, and frequently encourage or require mediation or conciliation before a final hearing. Building commissions and fair trading bodies in each state offer complaint and, in some cases, resolution services for residential building work. Building contracts themselves very often contain dispute-resolution clauses requiring mediation or expert determination before litigating.
Private mediation can run before you engage any of these processes, alongside them, or as the resolution step within them. The advantage of engaging early is that you may resolve the matter before it hardens into a formal proceeding, saving the cost and delay entirely. Getting advice early also helps you choose the right pathway — some property disputes have time limits or notification requirements that are easy to miss.
The hidden costs of fighting a property dispute
The amount named in a property dispute is rarely the real cost. A construction dispute that goes the distance can require multiple expert reports, each running into thousands of dollars, plus solicitors, plus barristers for a hearing — and the defects themselves often worsen while everyone argues, increasing the eventual repair bill. A boundary dispute between neighbours can poison daily life for years and reduce the saleability of both properties. A co-ownership deadlock can leave an asset frozen and deteriorating while its owners pay to fight over it.
Set against that, mediation looks very different. A single session, with costs typically shared, can resolve in hours what litigation would take a year or more to grind through — and it can do so in a way that actually fixes the underlying problem rather than just assigning blame.
How to prepare for a property mediation
A property mediation goes best when both sides come organised. If yours is a building or construction matter, bring the contract, any variations, the relevant plans and specifications, photographs of the work in question, and any expert reports or quotes for rectification. The clearer you can be about exactly which items are in dispute and what each would cost to resolve, the faster the conversation moves from grievance to solution.
For a boundary or co-ownership dispute, bring the title documents, any survey, and a clear sense of the outcome you actually want. As with any mediation, it pays to think through your realistic alternative in advance: what will it cost you, in money and time and stress, if this does not settle and instead goes to a tribunal or court? That figure is the yardstick for any offer on the table.