Frith v Murnane [2023] NSWLEC 1667

Branches falling from the tree are likely to cause damage or injury to the applicants or their property. Pruning according to arborist recommendations is a proportionate response; removal is not warranted.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 24 October 2023
Procedural Posture: Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Class 2 Application / Final Orders
Outcome: Application granted in part (pruning orders made, not removal)
Legal Topics: ['neighbouring Trees' 'pruning Orders' 'risk of Damage or Injury' 'jurisdiction Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']

['environmental Law' 'property Law'] ['neighbouring Trees' 'pruning Orders' 'risk of Damage or Injury' 'jurisdiction Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']

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

Procedural Posture

Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Class 2 Application / Final Orders

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether falling tree branches are likely to cause damage or injury under s 10 Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006' 'Whether pruning or removal of the tree is appropriate' 'Whether the applicants made reasonable efforts to reach agreement']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted in part (pruning orders made, not removal)

Orders

["Respondents to engage and pay for suitably qualified arborist (minimum AQF level 3 with insurances) to prune as specified within 60 days: remove deadwood >40mm diameter; remove two branches over applicants' property and reduce one other; prune others as arborist sees fit, up to 20% of crown mass." 'Works to be in...