Wright v Murphy [2024] NSWLEC 1293

Wright v Murphy [2024] NSWLEC 1293

In the absence of an approved DA and evidence that the tree is healthy and sound, there is no foundation to find likely damage or risk to persons in the foreseeable future; s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes between Neighbours) Act 2006 is not engaged.

Parties
Applicant: Andrew Martin Wright; Respondent: Robert Murphy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute (class 2) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours), Jurisdictional Requirements, Damage or Injury Likelihood
Environmental Law Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Jurisdictional Requirements Damage or Injury Likelihood

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Martin Wright

Applicant

Robert Murphy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tree Dispute (class 2) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether removal of a tree on neighbouring land is warranted due to likely damage or injury to property or persons under Trees (Disputes between Neighbours) Act 2006

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of an approved DA and evidence that the tree is healthy and sound, there is no foundation to find likely damage or risk to persons in the foreseeable future; s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes between Neighbours) Act 2006 is not engaged.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • The application is refused.