Maurici v Kaldor [2024] NSWLEC 121

Maurici v Kaldor [2024] NSWLEC 121

The applicant's notice of motion seeks orders which would effectively permit the removal of trees previously found by the Commissioner to be inappropriate for removal and the subject of a qualified pruning order. Such an order would amount to substantive relief beyond the 'working out' of the earlier judgment, contrary to the principle of finality and the limited scope of working out orders. The prior orders and findings intended pruning and fencing orders to operate collectively; the motion improperly seeks to relitigate or alter those conclusions.

Parties
Applicant: Anthony Phillip Maurici; First Respondent: Andrew Gabriel Kaldor; Second Respondent: Renata Kuzena; Third Respondent: Transport for New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion (procedural Application) / Interlocutory Decision (working Out Orders)
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Working Out Orders, Pruning or Removal of Trees, Finality of Orders, Costs
Practice and Procedure Land and Environment Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Working Out Orders Pruning or Removal of Trees Finality of Orders Costs

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Phillip Maurici

Applicant

Andrew Gabriel Kaldor

First Respondent

Renata Kuzena

Second Respondent

Transport for New South Wales

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion (procedural Application) / Interlocutory Decision (working Out Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's motion for further working out orders concerning the pruning or removal of trees is within the legitimate scope of 'working out' orders given the previous orders and reasons.
  2. 2 Whether the orders sought by the applicant amount to substantive relief different from the final orders.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's notice of motion seeks orders which would effectively permit the removal of trees previously found by the Commissioner to be inappropriate for removal and the subject of a qualified pruning order. Such an order would amount to substantive relief beyond the 'working out' of the earlier judgment, contrary to the principle of finality and the limited scope of working out orders. The prior orders and findings intended pruning and fencing orders to operate collectively; the motion improperly seeks to relitigate or alter those conclusions.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion filed on 6 August 2024 is dismissed.
  • The Applicant is to pay the Respondents' costs of the Motion.