Royle v Debelak [2020] NSWLEC 1354

Royle v Debelak [2020] NSWLEC 1354

The Court was satisfied that the applicant made a reasonable effort to reach agreement and that Pt 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied to the bamboo hedge. It was not satisfied that the hedge had caused, was causing, or was likely to cause damage to the applicant's property. However, the upper portion of the bamboo hedge severely obstructed iconic north-eastern views of Newport and Bilgola Beaches and headlands from the applicant's dwelling. Balancing that severe impact against the privacy and amenity the hedge provided to the respondents, the fairest and lawful outcome was to require the hedge to be pruned and maintained to the height of the top of the adjacent...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under Ss 7 and 14 B of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Onsite Hearing
Outcome
Orders made requiring the respondents to prune and maintain the bamboo hedge to the height of the top of the adjacent chain wire tennis court fence; no order made for alleged property damage because the Court was not satisfied damage was caused or likely.
Legal Topics
['bamboo Hedge' 'severe Obstruction of Views' 'alleged Damage to Adjoining Property' 'pruning Orders' 'neighbouring Land']
['trees Disputes' 'property Law' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['bamboo Hedge' 'severe Obstruction of Views' 'alleged Damage to Adjoining Property' 'pruning Orders' 'neighbouring Land']

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 Ss 7 and 14 B of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment After Onsite Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant made a reasonable effort to reach agreement with the respondents regarding pruning of the bamboo hedge.' "Whether the bamboo hedge had caused, was causing, or was likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicant's property." "Whether the bamboo hedge was severely obstructing a view from the applicant's dwelling." "Whether the applicant's interest in having the obstruction removed, remedied or restrained outweighed matters suggesting the undesirability of disturbing or interfering with the bamboo hedge." 'What pruning order, if any, should be made.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the applicant made a reasonable effort to reach agreement and that Pt 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied to the bamboo hedge. It was not satisfied that the hedge had caused, was causing, or was likely to cause damage to the applicant's property. However, the upper portion of the bamboo hedge severely obstructed iconic north-eastern views of Newport and Bilgola Beaches and headlands from the applicant's dwelling. Balancing that severe impact against the privacy and amenity the hedge provided to the respondents, the fairest and lawful outcome was to require the hedge to be pruned and maintained to the height of the top of the adjacent...

Court Disposition

Orders made requiring the respondents to prune and maintain the bamboo hedge to the height of the top of the adjacent chain wire tennis court fence; no order made for alleged property damage because the Court was not satisfied damage was caused or likely.

Orders

  • ["The respondents are to prune the bamboo hedge along the southern boundary of their property to the height of the top of the chain wire tennis court fence located adjacent to the shared boundary on the applicant's property, at a height of approximately RL48.86." 'The pruning is to be undertaken within 90 days of...