Maher v Bourquin [2011] NSWLEC 1267

The Court was not satisfied on the evidence and site inspection that any tree on the respondent's land caused the failure of the applicant's retaining wall; therefore the jurisdiction under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 was not enlivened and orders could not be made.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 18 May 2011
Procedural Posture: Class 2 Application Pursuant to Part 2 S 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Site Hearing
Outcome: Application dismissed
Legal Topics: ['injury to Persons' 'damage to Property' 'retaining Wall Damage' 'tree Roots' 'causation']

['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'property Law'] ['injury to Persons' 'damage to Property' 'retaining Wall Damage' 'tree Roots' 'causation']

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

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Pursuant to Part 2 S 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Site Hearing

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether a tree on the respondent's land caused damage to the applicant's retaining wall." "Whether the Court's jurisdiction under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 was enlivened." 'Whether compensation should be awarded for reconstruction of the retaining wall and the application lodgement fee.']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

['The claim for the application lodgement fee is dismissed.' 'The application is dismissed.']