Abela v Hammond [2019] NSWLEC 1160

Abela v Hammond [2019] NSWLEC 1160

The application was refused because the trees were not planted in a linear fashion or so as to form a hedge, and even if they could be characterised as a hedge, the Court was not satisfied that they severely obstructed the applicants' views given the remaining beach and water views.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S 14 B of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (nsw) / Onsite Hearing and Final Decision
Outcome
The application is refused.
Legal Topics
['hedges' 'obstruction of Views' 'pruning of Trees' 'agreement Between Neighbours']

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 S 14 B of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (nsw) / Onsite Hearing and Final Decision

  1. 1 ['Whether the trees were planted so as to form a hedge within s 14A(1)(a) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (NSW).' 'Whether the trees were at least 2.5 metres tall within s 14A(1)(b) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (NSW).' "Whether the trees severely obstructed views from the applicants' property within s 14E(2)(a)(ii) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (NSW)."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because the trees were not planted in a linear fashion or so as to form a hedge, and even if they could be characterised as a hedge, the Court was not satisfied that they severely obstructed the applicants' views given the remaining beach and water views.

Court Disposition

The application is refused.

Orders

  • ['The application is refused.']