Hrle and Wollman v Morcom [2018] NSWLEC 1410

Hrle and Wollman v Morcom [2018] NSWLEC 1410

Both Tree 2 and Tree 3 have caused damage to the applicants' property and removal is justified. However, given the generally poor condition of applicants' dwelling, and the context that repairs would have been needed regardless of the additional tree damage, there is no order for the respondents to contribute to repair costs. The respondents are responsible for tree removal costs; applicants for asbestos removal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Trees Dispute (class 2) / Final Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Orders made for removal of trees; no compensation for repairs; apportionment of responsibility for asbestos removal and access.
Legal Topics
['tree Disputes' 'damage to Property by Trees' 'neighbour Disputes' 'compensation for Damage' 'asbestos Removal']
['environmental Law' 'property Law'] ['tree Disputes' 'damage to Property by Trees' 'neighbour Disputes' 'compensation for Damage' 'asbestos Removal']

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

Trees Dispute (class 2) / Final Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether trees have caused or are likely to cause damage to neighbouring property under the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (NSW)' 'Whether trees should be removed' 'Whether respondents should contribute to cost of repairs' 'Responsibility for asbestos removal']

Ratio Decidendi

Both Tree 2 and Tree 3 have caused damage to the applicants' property and removal is justified. However, given the generally poor condition of applicants' dwelling, and the context that repairs would have been needed regardless of the additional tree damage, there is no order for the respondents to contribute to repair costs. The respondents are responsible for tree removal costs; applicants for asbestos removal.

Court Disposition

Orders made for removal of trees; no compensation for repairs; apportionment of responsibility for asbestos removal and access.

Orders

  • ['Applicants to remove all asbestos sheeting within 2 metres of any part of Tree 3 (Jacaranda) within 30 days, using a suitably licensed contractor, and in accordance with statutory requirements.' "Applicants to give respondents at least 7 days' notice of asbestos removal works." 'Respondents to allow reasonable...