Hacene v Sneddon [2007] NSWLEC 615

Hacene v Sneddon [2007] NSWLEC 615

The tree presented a real hazard to the applicant's property and occupants due to its structural faults and imminent risk, as corroborated by uncontested witness statements. The tree should be removed at the cost of its owner.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
['removal of a Tree' 'damage to Property' 'safety to Persons' 'bifurcated Trunk' 'cost of Removal']
['trees (neighbours)'] ['removal of a Tree' 'damage to Property' 'safety to Persons' 'bifurcated Trunk' 'cost of Removal']

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

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the subject tree should be removed due to risk of damage to property and persons' 'Responsibility for cost of removal']

Ratio Decidendi

The tree presented a real hazard to the applicant's property and occupants due to its structural faults and imminent risk, as corroborated by uncontested witness statements. The tree should be removed at the cost of its owner.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The subject tree in the front yard of No. 28 Valley View Crescent, Glendale is to be removed.' 'The removal must take place within 3 calendar months of this judgment.' 'The cost of removal to be borne by the owner of No. 28 Valley View Crescent.']