Biggs v Bingham [2019] NSWLEC 1282

The adverse impact on the applicants’ views from the hedge is greater than any impact on the respondents’ privacy from pruning, and orders to prune to 2.2 metres twice yearly are justified.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 19 June 2019
Procedural Posture: Neighbourhood Tree Dispute / Principal Judgment Extant After Hearing
Outcome: Application upheld
Legal Topics: ['trees (disputes Between Neighbours)' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'approved Landscape Plan']

['property' 'environmental Law'] ['trees (disputes Between Neighbours)' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'approved Landscape Plan']

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

Neighbourhood Tree Dispute / Principal Judgment Extant After Hearing

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the hedge formed by the respondents’ trees obstructs the applicants’ views and whether an order for pruning is justified under the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (NSW)']

Ratio Decidendi

The adverse impact on the applicants’ views from the hedge is greater than any impact on the respondents’ privacy from pruning, and orders to prune to 2.2 metres twice yearly are justified.

Court Disposition

Application upheld

Orders

['Twice yearly, during May and November, the respondents are to prune or have pruned the 13 hedge trees to a height no greater than 2.2 metres from the base of each tree.' 'On reasonable notice, the applicants are to allow any access required for the works during reasonable hours of the day.']