Kennedy v Scaysbrook [2018] NSWLEC 1456

Kennedy v Scaysbrook [2018] NSWLEC 1456

The Court was satisfied that the trees formed a hedge, severely obstructed views from the applicant's living area, and that reasonable efforts to reach agreement had been made. Balancing the applicant's views with the respondents' privacy and considering the trees' tolerance of pruning, removal was unnecessary; an initial pruning to 3.2 metres followed by annual pruning to 3.5 metres would maintain privacy and screening while restoring distant mountain views.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S 14 B of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (nsw) / Extemporaneous Decision Revised and Edited Prior to Publication; Final Orders Made After Onsite Hearing
Outcome
Application granted in part; pruning and annual maintenance orders made.
Legal Topics
['hedge' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'pruning Orders']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'property Law' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['hedge' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'pruning Orders']

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 14 B of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (nsw) / Extemporaneous Decision Revised and Edited Prior to Publication; Final Orders Made After Onsite Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the eight trees were planted so as to form a hedge and severely obstructed views from the applicant's dwelling." 'Whether the applicant had made reasonable effort to reach agreement with the respondents.' "Whether orders should be made pruning or replacing the trees, balancing the applicant's views against the respondents' privacy and screening concerns."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the trees formed a hedge, severely obstructed views from the applicant's living area, and that reasonable efforts to reach agreement had been made. Balancing the applicant's views with the respondents' privacy and considering the trees' tolerance of pruning, removal was unnecessary; an initial pruning to 3.2 metres followed by annual pruning to 3.5 metres would maintain privacy and screening while restoring distant mountain views.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; pruning and annual maintenance orders made.

Orders

  • ['Within 30 days of the date of these orders, the respondents are to engage and pay for suitably experienced arborists or horticulturalists (minimum AQF level 3), with all appropriate insurances to prune each of the eight trees in the hedge to a height of no more than 3.2 metres above ground level, measured from the...