Living in a strata community in New South Wales (NSW) often involves navigating shared responsibilities and, sometimes, disputes between residents. While disagreements are common, it’s important to understand that certain types of communication, particularly those that harm someone’s reputation, can have legal consequences. This article provides an overview of defamation within strata settings and explains why owners corporation members, lot owners, and strata managers must understand their rights and obligations.

Understanding Defamation in Strata Settings

What Constitutes Defamation

Defamation in strata settings, like elsewhere, involves making false statements that harm someone’s reputation. In the context of a strata community or owner corporation, this could involve a lot owner, tenant, committee member, strata manager, or even the chairperson. Imagine a scenario where a disgruntled owner sends an email to the strata committee falsely accusing the strata manager of financial mismanagement. This email, if seen by others, could seriously damage the strata manager’s reputation and potentially their career. This could be considered defamation.

Common Forms of Defamation in Strata

Defamation in strata settings often arises from disputes and disagreements, escalating into damaging statements. These defamatory statements can take many forms, spreading through various channels within the strata community.

• Emails: A common breeding ground for defamatory content. Disputes over by-laws, noise complaints, or parking arrangements can lead to heated email exchanges. An email containing false accusations or insults, especially if copied to multiple parties, could be considered defamatory.
• Strata Meetings: The heat of the moment during these meetings can lead to defamatory statements. For instance, a committee member making unfounded allegations against a lot owner during a meeting, without evidence or justification, could be grounds for a defamation claim.
• Written Communications: This category encompasses notices, letters, minutes of meetings, and even social media posts related to the strata scheme. For example, publishing false information about a tenant in a building newsletter, even if unintentional, could be considered defamation.

The key takeaway is that defamation doesn’t require malice or intent to harm. Even unintentional false statements can have serious legal consequences, highlighting the need for caution and careful communication in all strata-related matters.

Legal Requirements for Defamation Claims

Elements of Defamation

In NSW, for a statement to be considered defamatory, several elements must be proven. Firstly, the statement must be defamatory, meaning it would lower the reputation of the person in the eyes of ordinary people in the community. For example, falsely accusing someone of theft or incompetence in their role as a committee member could be defamatory. 

Secondly, the defamatory statement must refer to the plaintiff, meaning it must be about them, even if they are not named directly. Thirdly, the statement must be published or communicated to a third party. In strata settings, this often occurs through emails, meeting minutes, or even social media posts.

Available Defences to Defamation

Even if a statement meets the elements of defamation, there are defences that can be raised. One common defence is “honest opinion,” where the statement was an expression of belief rather than a statement of fact, and it was based on proper material. For example, a lot owner expressing their opinion that the strata manager is not managing the building well, based on their observations of ongoing maintenance issues, might be considered an honest opinion. Another defence is “justification,” which applies if the defamatory statement is substantially true. For instance, if a committee member was accused of misusing owners corporation funds, and this allegation was accurate, the defence of justification could be raised.

“Qualified privilege” is another important defence in defamation cases, particularly relevant in strata settings. This defence applies to communications made in circumstances where the publisher has a legal, social, or moral duty to communicate the information, and the recipient has a corresponding interest in receiving it. Imagine a scenario where a strata manager sends an email to all owners warning them about a particular resident who has been repeatedly violating by-laws. This communication, even if potentially defamatory, might be protected by qualified privilege as the strata manager has a duty to inform owners about matters affecting the property, and the owners have a vested interest in receiving this information. However, this defence can be defeated if the plaintiff can prove the defendant acted with malice, meaning the defendant acted with ill will or improper motive.

Key Cases on Defamation in Owners Corporation

Murray v Raynor [2019] NSWCA 274 Case Study

This case involved a dispute between a lot owner, Ms. Murray, and the chairperson of the owners corporation, Mr. Raynor, in NSW. Following a series of break-ins to the building’s mailboxes, Mr. Raynor, in his capacity as chairperson, sent emails to all residents, including Ms. Murray, reminding them to lock their mailboxes. Ms. Murray objected to these emails and responded with an email sent to Mr. Raynor and all other owners and occupiers in the strata scheme. This email accused Mr. Raynor of “criminal” behaviour, “stalking,” and having a “fixation” on her.

Mr. Raynor sued Ms. Murray for defamation, and the NSW District Court initially ruled in his favour, awarding him $120,000 in damages. The court found that Ms. Murray’s email contained defamatory imputations that damaged Mr. Raynor’s reputation. However, Ms. Murray appealed the decision, and the NSW Court of Appeal overturned the initial ruling. The Court of Appeal determined that Ms. Murray’s email was protected by qualified privilege, as it was sent in the context of a strata dispute and related to matters of common interest to the owners and occupiers.

Walden v Danieletto [2018] QDC 221 Case Study

This Queensland case involved a lot owner, Mr. Walden, and the body corporate manager, Mr. Danieletto. Mr. Walden had overdue levies, which he paid online the day before a general meeting. However, due to a technical issue, the body corporate’s system, managed by Mr. Danieletto, did not register the payment. During the meeting, Mr. Danieletto announced that Mr. Walden was “unfinancial,” and this statement was recorded in the meeting minutes.

Mr. Walden sued Mr. Danieletto for defamation, arguing that the “unfinancial” statement harmed his reputation. However, the Magistrates Court ruled in favour of Mr. Danieletto, finding that the statement was not defamatory and that even if it were, it was protected by qualified privilege. The court determined that Mr. Danieletto was acting reasonably in informing the body corporate about outstanding levies, a matter of common interest to the owners. Mr. Walden appealed the decision, but the District Court upheld the initial ruling, further solidifying the principle of qualified privilege in strata communication.

Best Practices for Strata Communications

Navigating communication in a strata scheme can be challenging. Disputes can arise easily, sometimes leading to actions that could be considered defamatory.

Guidelines for Email Communications

• Think before you send: Given that emails create a permanent record, carefully consider the content and tone of your message before sending it. Avoid using inflammatory language or making accusations.
• Be mindful of your audience: Be cautious about who you include in your email threads, especially when discussing sensitive matters. Copying in unnecessary parties can increase the risk of defamation.
• Stick to the facts: When addressing issues, focus on factual information and avoid making subjective or unfounded statements about individuals.
• Seek clarification before reacting: If you receive an email that upsets you, take time to process the information before responding. Consider seeking clarification from the sender or a third party, like a strata manager, to ensure a balanced understanding of the situation.

Proper Conduct in Strata Meetings

• Maintain decorum: Strata meetings can be emotionally charged, but it’s crucial to maintain a respectful and professional demeanour throughout. Avoid interrupting others or engaging in personal attacks.
• Focus on the agenda: Stick to the topics outlined in the meeting agenda and avoid introducing irrelevant issues or personal grievances.
• Be mindful of confidentiality: Remember that information shared in strata meetings is often confidential. Avoid disclosing sensitive information outside the meeting, especially if it could damage someone’s reputation.
• Seek resolution through appropriate channels: If a dispute arises, explore mediation or other forms of dispute resolution before resorting to legal action.

Conclusion

Defamation cases in strata settings highlight the importance of careful communication. False or damaging statements, whether spoken or written, can have serious legal consequences.

Understanding the elements of defamation, available defences, and best practices for communication is crucial for all strata community members. Seeking legal advice early on can help navigate these complex situations and protect the rights of everyone involved.

Need legal clarity? Our team is ready to assist you. Contact us today.

Frequently Asked Questions