Guttenberg &anor v Taylor & anor [2013] NSWLEC 1110

Guttenberg &anor v Taylor & anor [2013] NSWLEC 1110

Although the bamboo was planted so as to form a hedge and exceeded the height threshold, the Court was not satisfied that it severely obstructed a view from the applicants' dwelling. Considering the totality of the view available from the dwelling, the applicants retained views of the valley to the north/northeast, across Crown land, and distant views of the Loftus ridgeline; the obstruction was assessed as moderate, not severe. Because the jurisdictional threshold in s 14E(2) was not met, the Court could not order thinning, shortening or removal of the bamboo.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Hearing of Application for Orders for Removal of Bamboo
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['hedge' 'bamboo' 'obstruction of View' 'neighbouring Trees']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'land and Environment'] ['hedge' 'bamboo' 'obstruction of View' 'neighbouring Trees']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Under Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Hearing of Application for Orders for Removal of Bamboo

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the bamboo on the respondents' property was a group of two or more trees planted so as to form a hedge to which Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied." "Whether the bamboo was severely obstructing a view from the applicants' dwelling at the time of the hearing." "Whether the severity and nature of any obstruction was such that the applicants' interest in having it removed, remedied or restrained outweighed other matters suggesting the undesirability of disturbing or interfering with the bamboo." 'Whether recently planted bamboo could found orders based on possible future obstruction of views.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the bamboo was planted so as to form a hedge and exceeded the height threshold, the Court was not satisfied that it severely obstructed a view from the applicants' dwelling. Considering the totality of the view available from the dwelling, the applicants retained views of the valley to the north/northeast, across Crown land, and distant views of the Loftus ridgeline; the obstruction was assessed as moderate, not severe. Because the jurisdictional threshold in s 14E(2) was not met, the Court could not order thinning, shortening or removal of the bamboo.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']