Moody v Robertson & anor [2017] NSWLEC 1147

Moody v Robertson & anor [2017] NSWLEC 1147

There was insufficient probative evidence to demonstrate severe obstruction of sunlight to window W1 caused by the hedge, as required by s 14E(2)(a)(i) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006. Accordingly, the court lacked jurisdiction to make any orders.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['trees Disputes' 'obstruction of Sunlight' 'neighbour Rights']
['property Law'] ['trees Disputes' 'obstruction of Sunlight' 'neighbour Rights']

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

Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hedge severely obstructs sunlight to window W1 under s 14E(2)(a)(i) of the Trees Act' 'Whether evidence supports a severe obstruction attributable to the trees' "Whether the applicant's interest outweighs undesirability of interfering with the trees"]

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient probative evidence to demonstrate severe obstruction of sunlight to window W1 caused by the hedge, as required by s 14E(2)(a)(i) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006. Accordingly, the court lacked jurisdiction to make any orders.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']