Sivarajah & anor v Frazer & anor [2017] NSWLEC 1701

Sivarajah & anor v Frazer & anor [2017] NSWLEC 1701

The Court was satisfied that the branch from T1 caused damage to the fence, meeting s 10(2)(a) for T1, but found no risk of future damage or injury from T1, T2, or T3 justifying further orders. The trees had been pruned and the fence repaired by the respondents. No further evidence substantiated the applicants' fears or warranted the orders sought.

Parties
Applicants: Sunil & Arti Sivarajah; Respondents: John Frazer & Karen Press
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application (trees) / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours), Damage to Property, Dividing Fences

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunil & Arti Sivarajah

Applicants

John Frazer & Karen Press

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application (trees) / Final Hearing and Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the respondents' trees have caused, are causing, or are likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicants' property or injury to any person under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006
  2. 2 Whether further orders for pruning, removal of trees, or repair/replacement of fence are appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the branch from T1 caused damage to the fence, meeting s 10(2)(a) for T1, but found no risk of future damage or injury from T1, T2, or T3 justifying further orders. The trees had been pruned and the fence repaired by the respondents. No further evidence substantiated the applicants' fears or warranted the orders sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.