Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
- Medium Neutral Citation:
- Golden v Grobler [2011] NSWLEC 1088
- Hearing dates:
- 11 April 2011
- Decision date:
- 11 April 2011
- Jurisdiction:
- Class 2
- Before:
- Fakes C
- Decision:
-
Application dismissed
- Catchwords:
- TREES [NEIGHBOURS]; dead tree; damage to property; injury to persons;
- Legislation Cited:
- Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006
- Category:
- Principal judgment
- Parties:
-
Mr P Golden (Applicant)
Mr M Grobler (Respondent) - Representation:
-
Mr P Golden (Applicant in person)
Mr M Grobler (Respondent in person)
- File Number(s):
- 20095 of 2011
Judgment
1This is an application pursuant to Part 2 s 7 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) made by the owner of a property in Turramurra against the owner of tree located on an adjoining property.
2The applicant seeks the removal of the tree in order to prevent damage to property or injury to persons from falling branches.
3Photographs submitted with the application show a large dead eucalypt, probably a Blackbutt (Eucalyptus pilularis) located several metres from the corner of the applicant's tennis court. One photograph shows dead branches on the tennis court and other shows a large branch on the ground in the respondent's property that purportedly just missed the tennis court fence.
4Since the directions hearing, the tree has been reduced to a single trunk approximately 14-15 m high.
5Under s 10(2) of the Act, the Court must not make an order unless it is satisfied that the tree concerned has caused, is causing, or is likely in the near future to cause, damage to the applicant's property or is likely to cause injury to any person.
6I inspected the trunk and saw nothing that would lead me to conclude that the tree is likely to cause damage to the applicant's property now or in the near future or injury to any person.
7Therefore as no part of s 10(2) is met, the Orders of the Court are;
1. The application is dismissed.
J Fakes
Commissioner of the Court
DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.
Decision last updated: 01 June 2011