Manson v White [2011] NSWLEC 1295

Manson v White [2011] NSWLEC 1295

Neither T2 nor T3 severely obstructs the applicants' views from their upper living areas, and any obstruction to the ground floor is not severe; there is also significant contribution to obstruction from other trees and buildings. Thus, the statutory criteria for orders were not met, and the application was dismissed.

Parties
Applicants: D & J Manson; Respondents: B & S White
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Tree Disputes, Obstruction of Views, Neighbourhood Disputes
Environmental Law Property Law Tree Disputes Obstruction of Views Neighbourhood Disputes

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D & J Manson

Applicants

B & S White

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tree Dispute Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trees in question form a hedge under the Act
  2. 2 Whether the trees severely obstruct the applicant's views as required by s 14E(2)(a)(ii) of the Act
  3. 3 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to order removal or pruning of the trees

Ratio Decidendi

Neither T2 nor T3 severely obstructs the applicants' views from their upper living areas, and any obstruction to the ground floor is not severe; there is also significant contribution to obstruction from other trees and buildings. Thus, the statutory criteria for orders were not met, and the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.