South Australia Strata and Community Titles: The Magistrates Court

South Australia runs two parallel Acts for multi-lot developments, the older Strata Titles Act 1988 and the newer Community Titles Act 1996, and both send disputes to the Magistrates Court, not the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

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 strata and community titles law in South Australia only, primarily under the Community Titles Act 1996 (SA) with reference to the parallel Strata Titles Act 1988 (SA) for older schemes, verified 21 July 2026. It does not state a specific date for when schemes generally moved from registering under the 1988 Act to the 1996 Act; that detail could not be independently confirmed and is described qualitatively instead.

Two Acts, two terms, one forum

South Australia is unusual among the states in this cluster for running two parallel strata-style Acts at once. The Strata Titles Act 1988 (SA) is the older regime, under which the managing entity is called a "strata corporation." The Community Titles Act 1996 (SA) is the newer regime, generally used for schemes registered after it came into force, under which the managing entity is called a "community corporation." Both Acts remain fully in force, so an existing strata-titled scheme in South Australia can still be governed by the 1988 Act rather than the 1996 one. This page does not state a specific cutover date for when schemes generally moved to registering under the newer Act, because that detail could not be independently confirmed against a transitional provision; readers dealing with an older scheme should check which Act actually applies to it rather than assuming.

Disputes go to the Magistrates Court, not SACAT

Both Acts route disputes to the same forum in near-identical language. Section 41A of the Strata Titles Act 1988 (SA) and section 142 of the Community Titles Act 1996 (SA) each let an application be made where there is a claimed breach of the Act or the by-laws, a claimed wrongful act or default by the corporation or its management committee, a claim that a decision is unreasonable, oppressive or unjust, or a dispute between the corporation and a member, or between members, over occupation or use of a lot. Subsection (2) of each provision then requires that "an application must be made to the Magistrates Court," not the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. A person may only bring the matter in the District Court with that court's permission, and only where the complexity or significance of the matter justifies it; the Supreme Court becomes involved only where a court transfers a matter of general importance to it or states a question of law for its opinion. The Magistrates Court is directed to act "according to equity, good conscience and the substantial merits of the case, without regard to technicalities and legal forms," and it is not bound by the rules of evidence, though it can attempt to settle a matter by agreement between the parties before making any order at all.

What the court can order

Both South Australian Acts give the Magistrates Court a wide range of powers once a matter is before it: declaring the validity of by-laws or a corporation decision, varying or reversing a decision, altering the corporation's by-laws (subject to safeguards for members not party to the proceedings), giving judgment on a monetary claim, and making interim orders where urgency justifies one. Neither Act, and nothing on this page, tells a reader in advance that a specific by-law will be declared invalid or that a specific claim will succeed; the Court decides that on the facts and evidence before it. See strata disputes across Australia for how South Australia's court-based forum compares with the tribunals used elsewhere.

Pets: protection for assistance animals only

Section 37(1)(d)-(e) of the Community Titles Act 1996 (SA) prevents a by-law from stopping an occupier with a disability from keeping a "relevant animal," an assistance animal or therapeutic animal as defined by reference to the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (SA), trained to assist them, and separately protects a visitor with a disability using such an animal. Nothing in section 37 extends the same protection to an ordinary pet kept for companionship. This is a narrower position than New South Wales, where keeping any animal is presumed reasonable; a South Australian by-law addressing ordinary pets is instead assessed under the Act's general by-law validity rules rather than a pet-specific presumption. See pets in strata schemes across Australia for the full state-by-state comparison.

Contributions: set at a general meeting, recoverable as a debt

Section 114 requires a community corporation to fix the amount it needs from owners "in general meeting," by ordinary resolution, and specifically not by the management committee acting alone. Each lot's share is proportional to its lot entitlement unless a unanimous resolution says otherwise, and a corporation can permit payment by instalments and fix interest for arrears in accordance with the regulations. A contribution notice must be served at least 14 days before the payment date, and a contribution, instalment or interest can be recovered as a debt, enforceable jointly and severally against both the current owner and, in some circumstances, a subsequent owner of the lot. Section 116 requires the corporation to hold this money in an administrative fund and a sinking fund, with non-recurrent expenditure drawn from the sinking fund and everything else from the administrative fund. See strata levies across Australia for how this compares with the other states.

This page is general legal information about strata, owners corporation, body corporate and community title law in Australia, verified on 21 July 2026. It is not legal advice, and it does not cover every situation or every by-law or scheme rule that may apply to a particular development. For advice about a specific dispute, levy or by-law, consult a legal practitioner admitted in the relevant Australian state or territory.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does South Australia use SACAT for strata or community title disputes?

No. Section 41A(2) of the Strata Titles Act 1988 (SA) and section 142(2) of the Community Titles Act 1996 (SA) both direct an application to the Magistrates Court of South Australia, not the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

What is the difference between a strata corporation and a community corporation in South Australia?

A strata corporation manages a scheme registered under the older Strata Titles Act 1988 (SA); a community corporation manages a scheme registered under the newer Community Titles Act 1996 (SA). Both Acts remain in force, so which one applies depends on which Act the particular scheme was registered under.

Can a South Australian community corporation ban pets?

Section 37(1)(d)-(e) of the Community Titles Act 1996 (SA) only protects assistance and therapeutic animals used by an occupier or visitor with a disability. It does not give an ordinary pet the same statutory footing New South Wales gives, so a South Australian by-law about ordinary pets is assessed under the Act's general validity rules instead.

Who sets the levy amount in a South Australian community corporation?

The owners, in general meeting, by ordinary resolution, under section 114 of the Community Titles Act 1996 (SA). The Act specifically states the amount must not be fixed by the management committee alone.

Can a levy debt follow the lot if it is sold in South Australia?

Section 114(7) makes payment of a contribution, instalment or interest enforceable jointly and severally against the owner and subsequent owners of the lot, so in some circumstances an unpaid amount can affect a later owner.

Can I escalate a South Australian strata dispute beyond the Magistrates Court?

Only in limited circumstances. A person can bring or transfer a matter to the District Court with that court's permission, where its complexity or significance justifies it, and the Supreme Court becomes involved only for a matter of general importance or a stated question of law.