Owners of Strata Plan 7235 v Owners of Strata Plan 9829 [2015] NSWLEC 1277

Owners of Strata Plan 7235 v Owners of Strata Plan 9829 [2015] NSWLEC 1277

The plumbing evidence established that roots had entered and blocked the applicants' sewer pipes, causing dysfunction amounting to damage. Because the only trees in the immediate vicinity were on the respondents' property, it was highly probable that roots from one or more of those trees were a cause of the damage, satisfying s 10(2)(a) and engaging jurisdiction under s 9. However, the age, material and condition of the pipes and reactive clay soils also contributed to the problem, so the respondents were ordered to contribute 20% of selected past plumbing costs and 20% of the agreed cost of replacing the specified sewer pipe sections with solvent sealed PVC pipes.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S 7 Part 2 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Compensation and Rectification Ordered
Outcome
Application upheld in part.
Legal Topics
['tree Root Damage' 'sewer Pipe Blockages' 'compensation' 'rectification Works' 'damage to Property']
['trees Disputes' 'property Law' 'neighbour Disputes'] ['tree Root Damage' 'sewer Pipe Blockages' 'compensation' 'rectification Works' 'damage to Property']

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 7 Part 2 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Compensation and Rectification Ordered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether roots from one or more trees on the respondents' property caused, were causing, or could in the near future cause damage to property on the applicants' land within s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006." 'Whether the applicants should receive compensation for plumbing costs already incurred.' 'Whether the damaged sewer pipes should be replaced and what contribution the respondents should make to the replacement cost.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plumbing evidence established that roots had entered and blocked the applicants' sewer pipes, causing dysfunction amounting to damage. Because the only trees in the immediate vicinity were on the respondents' property, it was highly probable that roots from one or more of those trees were a cause of the damage, satisfying s 10(2)(a) and engaging jurisdiction under s 9. However, the age, material and condition of the pipes and reactive clay soils also contributed to the problem, so the respondents were ordered to contribute 20% of selected past plumbing costs and 20% of the agreed cost of replacing the specified sewer pipe sections with solvent sealed PVC pipes.

Court Disposition

Application upheld in part.

Orders

  • ['The application is upheld in part.' 'Within 30 days of the date of these orders, the respondents are to reimburse the applicants the sum of $721.60.' 'Within 40 days of the date of these orders, the applicants are to obtain three quotes for the replacement of the sewer pipe with solvent sealed PVC pipes, including...