Penklis & anor v Maley & anor [2016] NSWLEC 1615

Penklis & anor v Maley & anor [2016] NSWLEC 1615

The hedge does not cause a severe obstruction of any view from the applicants' dwelling within the meaning of s 14E(2)(a) of the Trees Act. Even if some obstruction was severe at one location, the severity and nature do not justify intervention given the extent of views remaining and other contributing obstructions. Therefore, no orders can be made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Class 2 (trees Disputes Between Neighbours) / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['hedge Obstruction of Views' 'severe View Obstruction' 'balancing Amenity and Privacy']
['trees (disputes Between Neighbours)'] ['hedge Obstruction of Views' 'severe View Obstruction' 'balancing Amenity and Privacy']

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 (trees Disputes Between Neighbours) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the hedge comprising six Shiny Xylosma trees severely obstructs any view from the applicants' dwelling within the meaning of Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, s 14E(2)" "Whether the obstruction is sufficiently severe so that the applicants' interest in removal, remediation or restraint outweighs competing considerations under the Act"]

Ratio Decidendi

The hedge does not cause a severe obstruction of any view from the applicants' dwelling within the meaning of s 14E(2)(a) of the Trees Act. Even if some obstruction was severe at one location, the severity and nature do not justify intervention given the extent of views remaining and other contributing obstructions. Therefore, no orders can be made.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']