Dividing Fences in Tasmania: Notice and Arbitration, Not Court

Tasmania is the only Australian jurisdiction where a dividing fence dispute is not decided by a court or tribunal. Under the Boundary Fences Act 1908 (Tas), an unresolved dispute goes to arbitration under the Commercial Arbitration Act 2011.

Information last verified on 21 July 2026 against the primary legislation. This page presents general legal information, not legal advice.

Jurisdiction scope: This page covers dividing fences law in Tasmania only, under the Boundary Fences Act 1908 (Tas), verified 21 July 2026 directly against the current AustLII text of sections 8, 9, 10 and 26. It does not cover Tasmania’s separate tree-dispute statute; see the linked tree disputes page for that.

Governing law and arbitration, not a court

Dividing fences in Tasmania are governed by the Boundary Fences Act 1908 (Tas). Part IV of the Act, headed "Arbitration", sets Tasmania apart from every other Australian jurisdiction. Section 26 provides that "if any matter, dispute, question, or difference arises between any adjoining owners... the same shall, unless otherwise specially provided for, be referred to and decided by arbitration in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Act 2011." Tasmania does not send fencing disputes to a court or to TASCAT, the state’s general civil tribunal; it sends them to a private arbitrator operating under the Commercial Arbitration Act.

Notice and the 21-day objection period

An owner wanting to compel a neighbour to contribute to a fence serves a notice to fence under section 9, in the prescribed form. If the person served objects to any proposal in that notice, section 10 gives them 21 days from service to signify their objection in writing, stating the grounds. Once an objection is raised and the owners cannot come to an agreement, section 10 directs that "all disputes, questions, and differences shall be determined by arbitration in the manner provided by Part IV," pointing straight back to the arbitration process in section 26.

Cost sharing: no fixed default, agreed or awarded

Unlike New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and the Northern Territory, Tasmania’s Act does not state a fixed equal-contribution default. Section 8 provides that adjoining owners are liable to contribute to the erection of a sufficient fence "in such proportion as may be (a) agreed upon; or (b) awarded under the provisions of this Act." In practice, this means the proportion is either something the neighbours settle themselves, or a figure the arbitrator determines under Part IV where they cannot. Section 9(2) also protects an owner from having to contribute to a fence built without the required notice, unless they separately agreed to it.

What an arbitrator can decide

Section 35 spells out exactly what an arbitrator can decide, in addition to the general powers arbitral tribunals already have under the Commercial Arbitration Act 2011: whether a fence should be erected at all, whether an existing fence should be converted to a rabbit-proof fence, the description or kind of fence, the necessity for the work, the time, manner and person responsible for carrying it out, and the cost and how that cost should be split between the parties. This is a comprehensive list, covering essentially every practical question a Tasmanian fencing dispute could raise, decided by the arbitrator rather than a court. Section 36 requires the arbitrator to consider the benefit likely to accrue to each owner from the fence, a factor that can affect the proportion awarded beyond a simple even split. Section 37 addresses contribution where a tenant, rather than the owner, is involved. Because this is arbitration rather than litigation, the process and its formality can differ from what a Magistrates Court or tribunal hearing in another state would involve; a person facing this process for the first time may want to understand how arbitration under the Commercial Arbitration Act 2011 actually works before it begins.

Repairs are treated separately from new fences

Part III of the Act, sections 22 to 25, deals specifically with repairing an existing fence rather than building a new one. Owners are generally liable to repair fences under section 22, with its own procedure for compelling a contribution to repair costs under section 23, and section 24 addresses the situation where a fence is destroyed by accident. This separate Part means a Tasmanian dispute about a fence that has fallen into disrepair follows a related but distinct path from a dispute about erecting a fence where none currently exists, though both ultimately funnel into the same Part IV arbitration process if they cannot be resolved by agreement.

How Tasmania compares

Tasmania is the only Australian jurisdiction that uses arbitration rather than a court or tribunal for fencing disputes, and one of the few without a fixed statutory cost-sharing default. See dividing fences in Australia for the full comparison, and tree disputes in Tasmania for how the state’s separate, TASCAT-based process handles trees instead.

This page is general legal information about neighbour disputes in Australia, verified on 21 July 2026. It is not legal advice, and it does not cover every situation. For advice about your own dispute, consult a legal practitioner admitted in the relevant Australian state or territory.